THE 
A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

(INCLUDING  THE  A  B  C  OF  ECONOMICS) 
BY 

I.  G.  SAVOY 

(Editor  New  England  Socialist^    Official  Organ 
of  Massachusetts  Socialist  Party) 

AUTHOR  OF  "SOCIALISM  AND  YOUTH."  "THE 
DISHONOR  OF  BESSY."  ETC. 

AND 

M.  O.  TECK 

AUTHOR  OF  "FOOD  ADULTERATION."  "PATRIOTISM 
AND  PROFIT,"   ETC. 

"THE  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM  MEANS       * 
THE  X  Y  Z  OF  CAPITALISM" 


BOSTON:     RICHARD   G.   BADGER 
TORONTO:    COFP  CLARK  CO..  LIMITED 


Copyright,  1915,  by  Richard  G.  Badger 
All  rights  reserved 


*s 


BY  WAY  OF  INTRODUCTION 

The  authors  of  this  little  book,  which  is  a  frank 
piece  of  Socialist  propaganda,  lay  no  great  stress  on 
the  originality  of  what  they  say.  That  would  be 
quite  impossible  at  this  date  for  any  elementary  book 
on  Socialism.  If  there  be  any  originality  at  all, 
then,  it  is  in  the  manner  of  presenting  the  subject, 
in  including  an  A  B  C  of  Economics,  and  in  giving  an 
easily  constructed,  but  firmly  founded  argument  to- 
gether with  the  material  for  making  it  intelligible. 

The  book  is  so  written  that  it  touches  upon  much 
material  more  than  once,  but  each  time  from  a  dif- 
ferent standpoint.  This  kind  of  repetition  amplifies 
the  reader's  knowledge,  impresses  the  point  and  re- 
lieves the  monotony  so  characteristic  of  many  good 
books  on  the  subject. 

There  is  no  reason  why  a  conscientious  reading  of 
Part  One  alone  should  not  give  the  reader  all  the  es- 
sentials of  modem  Socialism.  Part  Two  is  well  cal- 
culated to  lead  the  interested  student  into  the  de- 
tailed aspects  of  the  subject.  / 

This  book  is  dedicated  to  all  those  slaves  whom  it 
would  earnestly  help  to  free,  not  through  enthusiasm 
that  results  only  in  fine  phrases,  but  through  knowl- 
edge that  leads  to  intelligent  action. 

The  Authors.       / 


329339 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2007  witii  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcliive.org/details/abcofsocialisminOOsavoricli 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  VAOB 

PART  ONE  —  THE  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

I  Introductory  —  The  Extent  and  Growth  of  Modern 
Socialism  —  Method  of  Approaching  the  Subject 

—  Socialism  in  Its  Four  Phfises 9 

II  Socialism  as  a  Study  of  Human  Progress  —  Elements 
of  Economic  Determinism  —  Class  Struggles  of  the 
Past         23 

III  The    Modern    Class    Struggle  —  Present    Economic 

Classes  —  Modern    Government  —  Economic    Basis 

of  War 37 

IV  Socialism  as  a  Criticism  of  Modem  Society  —  Wide- 

spread Evil  Conditions  —  Capitalist  and  Socialist 

Efficiency 54 

V  Ideal  Aspects  of  Socialism — "Utopias" — Socialism 
Distinguished  from  Communism  —  Socialism,  Uto- 
pian   and    Scientific  —  Origin    of    Some    Mistaken 

Objections  to  Socialism 66 

VI  The  Socialist  Party  —  What  It  Stands  for  and  How 
It  Operates  —  Difference  Between  Government 
Ownership  and  Socialism  —  Socialist  Influence  on 

Legislation  —  Socialism  and  War 81 

VII    Objections   to    Socialism  —  Their    Assumptions    and 

Errors 96 

PART  TWO  —  THE  A  B  C  OF  ECONOMICS 

The  Labor  Theory  of  Value  —  Value  of  Labor  — 
Surplus  Value  —  Price  —  Profit,  Interest,  Rent  — 
Capital  —  Price  of  Labor-Power 115 


PART  ONE 
THE  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 


THE  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 


CHAPTER  I 

Introductory  —  The  Extent  and  Growth  of  Modem  Socialism  — 
Method  of  Approaching  the  Subject  — Socialism  In  Its  Four 
Phases. 

IF  you  are  a  millionaire,  or  a  million-heiress,  this 
little  book  is  not  intended  especially  for  you,  al- 
though you  may  profit  a  good  deal  from  reading 
it.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  you  are  a  workingman  or 
a  workingwoman  (for  to  Socialists  the  woman  is  the 
man's  equal),  then  you  know  what  it  is  to  be  worried 
on  all  sides  by  the  troubles  of  making  a  living  —  you 
know  what  it  is  to  work  long  hours  for  small  pay  — 
to  lay  awake  nights  wondering  how  you  may  improve 
your  condition.  You  know,  too,  what  it  is  to  become 
discouraged  so  often,  and  to  wonder  whether  after 
all  there  is  a  way  out  of  your  plight.  You  have  lis- 
tened to  reformers  with  silk  hats  upon  their  heads 
and  frock  coats  upon  their  backs,  and  have  felt  that 
their  big  words  served  only  to  cover  small  ideas. 
It  is  for  you,  then,  that  this  book  is  written,  and  as 
you  turn  to  the  pages  that  follow  no  silk-hat  reform- 
ers will  greet  you,  but  rather  the  opposite  to  their 
methods  will  be  employed :  big  ideas  in  small  words. 

Above  all,  in  considering  your  own  troubles  —  and 
you  know  them  better  than  we  can  tell  —  do  not  ac- 
cept any  explanation  which  does  not  fit  into  your 
every  day  experience  and  your  common  sense.  What 
is  the  use  of  a  nicely-worded  proof  that  times  are 


.1^; ..: :';...  •»  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

good,  when  wife  and  children  are  hungry,  and  father 
is  out  of  work?  Where  is  the  value  of  smug  procla- 
mations of  boundless  prosperity,  when  on  every  hand 
you  find  your  fellow-workers  no  better  off  than  your- 
self? How  can  you  be  deceived  about  the  annual 
hoax  called  "  bumper  crops  "  when  even  the  farm- 
ers, who  raise  the  crops,  complain  that  they  do  not 
receive  the  benefits  of  the  crop  increase,  any  more 
than  you  receive  the  full  benefit  of  your  daily  and 
nightly  toil?  Is  it  not  peculiar  that  it  is  only  the 
rich  who  have  no  fault  to  find  with  modern  condi- 
tions, except  that  the  "  lower  classes  "  are  becoming 
too  dissatisfied?  If  this  is  so,  and  the  only  people 
who  are  content  with  the  way  things  are  run  to-day 
are  the  rich,  it  must  be  because  the  rich  find  them- 
selves growing  richer,  while  your  own  experience 
teaches  you  that  your  position  is  every  day  growing 
less  bearable. 

Not  only  are  we  of  America  suffering  in  this  man- 
ner. Take  strikes  like  the  miners'  revolt  in  Colo- 
rado, in  Michigan,  in  Arkansas,  during  the  year  of 
1914.  In  Colorado  men  and  women  were  shot  down 
in  cold  blood  by  the  mine  owners  and  their  hirelings. 
According  to  subsequent  government  verdict,  the 
burning  of  an  entire  miners'  community  (which  had 
been  forced  to  live  in  tents  after  being  evicted  from 
their  homes  by  the  company)  was  charged  to  the 
owners  of  the  mines.  For  every  strike  of  this  nature 
here  there  are  an  ever  increasing  number  of  dupli- 
cates abroad.  In  other  words,  the  suff^ering  of  the 
working-class  extends  beyond  national  boundaries; 
their  cry  arises  from  the  entire  face  of  the  globe; 
their  misery  is  international. 

In  this  particular  country  we  have  been  told  that 
the  cause  of  this  misery  was  the  tariff,  the  trusts,  the 


VmAT  IS  THE  MATTER?       .      11 

c^  lU--^  T>  ,.-.-,.    ,.    :.:  -    '--^^  :.< 

extravagance  of  the  poor,  and  what  not  else,  accord- 
ing to  which  politician  you  heard  first.  But  we  have 
had  high  tariff  and  low  tariff  —  we  have  had  "  trust- 
busting  "  and  trust  "  regulation  " —  we  have  our- 
selves been  as  thrifty  and  sparing  as  we  possibly 
could.  Yet  trusts  flourish  to-day  more  than  ever, 
and  we  are  a  bit  worse  off  than  before.  As  a  matter 
of  cold  government  statistics,  in  twelve  years  the  cost 
of  living  has  increased  50%,  and  in  seventeen  years 
it  has  increased  80%,  while  wages  and  salaries  have 
increased  only  20%.  It  is  plainly  to  be  seen  from 
this  official  information  that  the  workers  are  going 
positively  backwards. 

What  is  the  matter.?     Why  is  this  so.? 

You  did  not  really  need  the  figures  to  tell  you  that 
affairs  are  so  bad;  you  did  not  really  need  to  be  re- 
minded of  the  terrible  strikes  occurring  all  over  the 
world,  inspired  by  intolerable  conditions  among  the 
laborers;  nor  do  you,  if  you  have  thought  the  least 
bit  about  it,  need  to  be  told  that  the  churches  are 
unable  to  cope  with  the  numerous  social  problems 
that  have  arisen,  especially  wide-spread  poverty  and 
prostitution.  Before  the  ever-increasing  wretched- 
ness of  the  poor,  organized  charity  stands  helpless. 
You  see  all  this  around  you.  You  are  only  too  fa- 
miliar with  the  facts  themselves.  But  who,  or  what, 
is  the  cause  of  these  conditions?  Why  is  all  this, 
anyway? 

If  it  were  a  person  who  caused  such  untold  and 
untellable  sorrow  to  such  a  large  part  of  the  world's 
population,  he  or  she  would  long  ago  have  been  as- 
sassinated. Never  would  toilers  undergo  all  this 
misery  and  degradation  if  they  could  end  it  by  killing 
a  ruler  or  a  magnate.  Indeed,  the  history  of  the 
past  shows  that  such  assassinations  have  been  at- 


12  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

tempted  and  many  successfully  carried  out,  by  men 
and  women  who  mistakenly  thought  that  a  particular 
individual  was  at  fault. 

But  suppose,  instead  of  being  a  person,  it  is  a  cer- 
tain SYSTEM  of  government  and  industry  which  causes 
all  the  trouble  —  a  system  of  false  ideas,  long  since 
past  their  stage  of  usefulness  to  the  world?  In  this 
case,  why  not  assassinate  the  system?  It  is  here 
that  we  place  our  finger  upon  modem  society's  sore 
spot,  and  we  must  not  be  surprised  if  society  cries 
out  in  pain  and  indignation.  It  is  here,  too,  that  we 
come  to  the  real  purpose  of  this  little  book  —  yoiir 
little  book,  we  should  say,  for  it  is  in  your  interest 
and  for  your  political  and  industrial  salvation  that 
every  line  within  it  is  written. 

The  assassination  of  individuals  in  the  past,  for 
the  purpose  of  bettering  the  condition  of  oppressed 
classes,  was  a  failure  because  the  root  of  the  evil  had 
not  been  touched.  Rulers  merely  are  symbols  of 
underlying  systems^  and  when  one  ruler  disappears 
there  is  another  to  take  his  place  and  defend  the  par- 
ticular system  of  that  place  and  epoch.  The  history 
of  Russia  bears  striking  testimony  to  this  claim. 
In  the  United  States  this  error  of  believing  rulers  to 
blame  occurs  in  different  forms.  We  often  hear  peo- 
ple say  that  such  and  such  a  president  will  bring  pros- 
perity, while  another  will  cause  ruin  to  the  country. 
But  presidents,  so  far  as  the  working-class  is  con- 
cerned, can  do  little  to  make  things  better  or  worse,  de- 
spite what  politicians  say  in  their  anxiety  to  deceive 
the  people  into  casting  votes  for  particular  candidates. 
Presidents,  just  as  rulers  of  monarchies,  stand  for 
certain  systems  of  government  and  industrial  policies. 
They  are  the  servants,  not  the  cause  of  the  system. 
At  best,  the  opposition  between  the  various  candi- 


HOW  TO  APPROACH  SUBJECT    13 

dates  for  presidency  (outside  of  the  Socialist  party) 
represents  different  views  as  to  the  same  system  under 
which  our  country  is  at  present  conducted,  but  the 
candidates  all  agree  on  the  fundamental  propositions 
of  the  system  itself.  This  particular  point  will  be- 
come clearer  as  we  progress  in  these  pages ;  for  the 
present,  the  chief  idea  to  retain  is,  that  individuals 
cannot  in  themselves  cause  or  remedy  world-wide  con- 
ditions such  as  the  working-class  to-day  faces.  This 
holds  true  whether  those  individuals  are  kings  or 
presidents,  whether  the  countries  are  republics  or 
monarchies.  In  order  to  reach  the  root  of  the  trou- 
ble we  must  penetrate  into  the  system  for  which  such 
individuals  stand. 

We  have  seen,  then,  that  reform  remedies  proposed 
have  done  little  good  —  that  even  the  drastic  resort 
to  assassination  has  accomplished  nothing.  In  both 
cases,  that  of  tariff-tinkering,  regulation  of  trusts 
and  railroads,  and  the  rest  of  the  reform  program, 
and  in  the  personal  revenge  upon  ruling  individuals, 
the  attempt  at  betterment  failed  because  the  core  of 
the  system  remained  untouched. 

What  is  that  system?  And  why  can  Socialism 
alone  remedy  the  evils  the  system  has  caused.'*  For 
a  proper  understanding  of  the  relation  of  Socialism 
to  the  system,  we  must  wait  until  we  have  read  this 
entire  book ;  that  is  indeed  asking  little  when  we  con- 
sider what  enormous  ills  such  an  understanding  will 
help  to  remedy.  It  is  only  the  unscrupulous  poli- 
tician who  will  deliberately  mislead  his  hearers  into 
thinking  that  the  workingman's  ills  are  to  be  reme- 
died by  the  enactment  of  a  little  law  here  and  the 
repeal  of  a  little  law  there.  The  matter  demands  far 
more  effort  and  a  better  cooperation  from  the 
worker,  who  must  think  his  way  in,  as  well  as  think 


14  ABC  OF  SOCIALISM 

Tus  way  out.  In  other  words,  in  order  to  apply  the 
cure,  we  must  understand  the  disease. 

You  may  have  heard  the  word  Socialism  before. 
You  may  not  know  what  it  stands  for,  but  you  know 
the  word.  You  may  think  you  know  what  it  stands 
for,  but  perhaps  you  are  misinformed,  especially  if, 
being  a  member  of  the  working-class,  you  feel  at  pres- 
ent against  it  the  moment  you  read  or  hear  the  word. 
It  is  our  claim  that  Socialism  is  the  way  out  of  the 
workers'  troubles;  it  is  furthermore  our  claim  that 
you  have  no  moral  right  to  say  "  No  "  to  this  propo- 
sition until  you  understand  modem  conditions,  both 
as  they  surround  you  and  in  the  light  of  the  past  — 
until  you  have  heard  our  solution  and  given  it  your 
most  earnest  thought.  That  is  all  that  Socialism 
asks :  for  all  mankind,  and  especially  the  workers,  to 
learn  its  claim  and  then  think. 

But  perhaps  even  now  you  are  skeptical  and  ask, 
"  Why  should  I  bother  with  this  particular  attempt 
to  remedy  my  woes?  There  have  been  so  many  at- 
tempts and  each  has  proved  a  false  illusion.  What 
guarantee  have  I  that  this  is  any  different  ?  "  To 
which  we  reply,  "  Although  yours  is  not  a  strictly 
logical  way  of  determining  the  worth  of  any  propo- 
sition, still,  we  shall  take  you  at  your  word  and  invite 
you  to  witness  the  growth  of  our  idea  since  its  be- 
ginning. Surely  an  idea  that  has  grown  so  rapidly, 
that  has  roused  such  determined  opposition  and  such 
self-sacrificing  devotion,  merits  your  impartial  in- 
vestigation." 

For  in  truth  the  growth  of  Socialism  has  been  re- 
markable, and  to-day  it  constitutes  the  largest  sin- 
gle political  party  in  the  world.  Here  follow  the 
official  figures  for  1912-1914  as  compiled  by  the  Na- 
tional Office  of  the  Socialist  Party  of  America : 


HOW  TO  APPROACH  SUBJECT 


16 


THE  SOCIALIST  PARTY. 

Membership,  Vote  and  Parliamentary  Representation 
of  the  World  — 1912-1914 

Parliament 

Comitry               Membership  Vote    Socialist  Total 

Argentine   4,000  48,000          10  120 

Australia    200,000  678,012          66  111 

Austria     289,524  1,053,627          82  516 

Belgium   269,830  483,241          40  186 

Bulgaria    6,000  85,489          20  211 

Canada    6,180  15,857  

Denmark  52,000  107,412          36  114 

Finland     51,798  310,503          90  200 

France   63,358  1,398,771  101  597 

Germany   982,850  4,250,399  110  397 

Great  Britain   ...     100,000  378,839          42  670 

Greece    1,000  12,000  ...  181 

Hungary*    100,000  

Italy     40,000  997,000          79  508 

Luxembourg    4,000            7  53 

Netherlands    20,623  145,588          18  100 

New  Zealand  ....       52,000  44,960            4  80 

Norway  43,557  124,594          23  123 

Portugal    3,500  3,308            1  164 

Roumania 2,057 

Russia    168,000  200,000          14  442 

Servia    3,000  25,000            2  166 

South  Africa 26,098  f         7  121 

Spain    40,000  40,791            1  406 

Sweden    70,000  229,339          73  230 

Switzerland    31,384  105,000          15  189 

United  States   ...     118,045  931,406  ...  531 

Totals     2,716,649      11,701,291        841      6,416 

In  addition  to  the  vote  and  membership  figures  as  ^ven 
above,  there  are  also  Socialist  movements  in  Armenia,  Bolivia, 
Chile,  China,  Cuba,  Iceland,  Japan,  Newfoundland,  Persia, 
Turkey  and  Uruguay.  In  Australia,  New  Zealand  and  South 
Africa  the  figures  given  include  the  vote  of  the  Labor  parties, 
as  well  as  the  Socialist  parties.  These  Labor  parties  are  not 
in  all  respects  in  accord  with  the  International  Socialist  organ- 
ization, but  for  practical  purposes  may  be  considered  Socialist. 

*  Most  of  the  Socialists  are  disfranchised  in  Hungary  on 
account  of  property  qualifications, 
t  In  Transvaal  only. 


16  ABC  OF  SOCIALISM 

Let  us  stop  for  a  moment  to  assimilate  the  full 
significance  of  these  figures.  If  the  Socialist  vote  of 
the  world  were  concentrated  in  the  United  States,  it 
could  control,  by  an  overwhelming  majority,  the 
national  elections.  Taking  a  year  like  1908  as  an 
average  year,  the  Democrats  polled  about  six  and  a 
half  million,  while  the  Republicans  polled  a  little  over 
seven  and  a  half  million.  Where  would  these  parties 
ever  stand  any  kind  of  chance  with  Socialism's  eleven 
and  three-quarters  millions?  Especially  if  some  Bull- 
Moose  party  appeared  to  split  them  up  further  ?  The 
German  votes  alone  would  be  sufficient  to  make  a 
good-sized  state  like  Massachusetts,  with  enough  left 
over  for  a  first-class  city  like  Boston.  All  except 
about  ten  countries  in  the  above  list  contain  more 
Socialist  voters  than  there  are  troops  in  the  United 
States'  standing  army. 

The  above  table  shows  clearly  that  Socialism  is  an 
mternational  movement;  that  with  its  11,701,^91 
votes  it  is  (as  we  have  called  it)  the  largest  political 
parti/  in  the  world.  A  message  that  has  engaged 
the  devotion  of  such  an  immense  number  of  men  and 
women  (for  the  Socialist  party  was  the  first  to  recog- 
nize woman's  right  and  duty  to  vote)  not  only  mer- 
its your  closest  attention,  but  it  must  have  an  intense 
economic,  political  and  intellectual  significance.  So- 
cialism, indeed,  permeates  all  the  advanced  thought 
of  the  world.  Although  its  immediate  methods  and 
purposes  must  be  adapted  to  the  particular  country 
in  which  it  seeks  to  operate,  underneath  all  the  dif- 
ferent movements  there  are  certain  fundamental,  uni- 
fying principles.  These  principles,  it  may  be  added, 
are  the  rock-bottom  test  of  what  Socialism  is  —  no 
matter  what  it  may  be  called  in  this  place  or  that. 
Without   these  principles,  which  we  shall  learn  in 


GROWTH  OF  SOCIALISM  17 

the  course  of  the  book,  you  may  call  a  movement  So- 
cialism but  it  will  have  no  legitimate  claim  to  the 
name. 

Socialism  in  the  United  States,  The  growth  of 
Socialism  in  the  United  States  has  been  no  less  re- 
markable than  abroad.  The  following  table  goes  as 
far  as  1912;  according  to  estimates  made  for  1914 
the  vote  has  risen  throughout  the  nation.^ 

Growth  of  Socialist  Vote  in  United  States 

Year.  Soc.  Party    S.  L.  P.  Total. 

1888  2,068  2,068 

1890  13,704  13,704 

1892  21,512  21,512 

1894  30,020  30,020 

1896  36,275  36,275 

1898  82,204  82,204 

1900 96,931         33,405  130,336 

1902  223,494         53,763  277,257 

1904  408,230        33,546  441,776 

1906  331,043        20,265  351,308 

1908  424,488         14,021  438,509 

1910  607,674        34,115  641,789 

1912  901,062         30,344  931,406 


1  The  following,  from  Morris  Hillquitt's  "  Socialism  Summed 
Up,"  pp.  98-99,  helps  to  explain  the  presence  of  two  different 
party  votes  after  1898  in  the  above  table: 

"The  dawn  of  the  present  century  found  a  considerable 
Socialist  and  semi-Socialist  sentiment  among  several  sections  of 
the  American  population,  and  also  the  rudiments  of  a  Socialist 
political  organization.  The  latter  were  represented  by  two 
separate  factions  of  the  "  Socialist  Labor  Party,"  the  old-time 
organization  of  the  Socialists  in  America,  the  *'  Social  Demo- 
cratic Party,"  which  had  then  been  recently  organized,  and 
several  minor  Socialist  organizations.  Dissensions  and  an- 
tagonism, so  characteristic  of  the  formative  stages  of  the  So- 
cialist movement  in  every  coimtry,  were  the  principal  feature 
of  the  American  Socialist  organizations  until  the  middle  of 
1901,  when  all  organizations  with  one  exception  (that  of  the 
more  irreconcilable  faction  of  the  Socialist  Labor  Party) 
united.  The  formal  unification  was  accomplished  at  a  joint 
national  convention,  which  was  held  in  Indianapolis  on  July 
29,  1901,  and  which  created  the  present  Socialist  Party." 


18  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

It  is  instructive,  too,  in  connection  with  the  table 
just  cited,  to  compare  the  figures  of  some  of  the 
states  of  the  Union  with  that  of  some  of  the  foreign 
countries  in  the  previous  list. 

According  to  returns  for  1914,  Texas  has  more 
Socialist  votes  than  the  entire  Argentine  Republic. 
The  state  of  New  York,  following  the  same  returns, 
has  more  than  Spain  and  South  Africa  put  together. 
Ohio,  in  1912,  cast  more  Socialistic  votes  than  the 
whole  of  Bulgaria  possessed  at  that  time.  Pennsyl- 
vania did  likewise. 

Authority  of  the  Party.  A  party  which  is  fast 
attaining  such  authority  in  the  civilized  world  must 
be  founded  on  some  inner  authority  of  its  own.  A 
proper  appreciation  of  the  basis  of  that  authority 
is  necessary  to  the  best  understanding  of  Socialism. 

The  supreme  authority  of  the  Catholic  Church,  for 
instance,  is  the  Pope.  The  supreme  authority  of  a 
monarchy  is  a  King.  The  supreme  authority  of  a 
republic  such  as  the  United  States  is,  in  name  at 
least,  the  citizens,  as  represented  by  their  elected  of- 
ficers. In  like  manner,  the  supreme  authority  for  the 
principles  of  the  Socialist  Party  is  the  official  utter- 
ance of  its  bodies,  which  are  chosen  by  popular  vote 
of  the  party  membership.  Not  alone  this,  but  what- 
ever such  bodies  pass  must  afterwards  be  accepted 
and  ratified  by  the  party  membership,  in  a  referen- 
dum vote.  The  Socialist  system,  then,  has  this 
advantage  over  the  methods  of  this  country :  not  only 
are  officers  chosen  by  the  voters,  but  whatever  these 
bodies  perform  must  be  accepted  or  rejected  by  the 
same  voters.  It  may  thus  be  seen  that  as  far  as  the 
Socialist  Party  is  concerned,  the  real  veto  power  lies 
in  the  membership  as  a  whole. 

The  Socialist  Party,  as  we  have  shown,  is  inter- 


PARTY  AUTHORITY  19 

national  in  scope  and  organization.  This  organiza- 
tion is  supported  solely  by  the  dues-paying  member- 
ship which  constitutes  its  ranks.  Every  member,  of 
course,  is  a  Socialist  and  votes  the  Socialist  ticket, 
but  that  does  not  mean  that  any  person  who  votes 
the  Socialist  ticket  is  therefore  a  member  of  the 
party.  Thus,  while  Germany  had,  just  before  the 
war  with  the  Allies  broke  out,  4,250,399  votes  for 
Socialism,  the  dues-paying  membership  of  the  party 
was  982,850.  It  may  be  noticed  in  this  connection 
that  Socialists  generally  regard  the  dues-paying 
membership  as  the  nucleus  around  which  will  be  built 
up  a  strong  body  of  scientifically  grounded  voters; 
men  and  women  who  vote  Socialism  because  they 
know  it,  not  through  temporary  enthusiasm  which  at 
the  next  election  is  just  as  likely  to  shift  in  another 
direction.  Socialists  do  not  necessarily  expect,  then, 
that  in  time  they  will  win  a  majority  of  a  country's 
voters  into  their  dues-paying  ranks ;  the  latter,  how- 
ever, is  necessary  as  a  means  of  financing  the  educa- 
tional purposes  of  Socialist  activity  and  forming  a 
strongly  developed  center  from  which  to  radiate  into 
the  entire  community. 

The  organization  of  the  party  will  be  the  subject 
of  a  different  chapter;  what  we  now  wish  to  impress 
is  the  fact  that  the  only  authoritative  sources  to 
which  you  can  go  for  information  as  to  what  truly 
is  modern  Socialism  are  the  official  party  utterances. 

A  man  may  tell  you,  for  instance,  that  in  order 
to  be  a  Socialist  you  must  be  also  an  atheist.  He 
will  then  proceed,  in  the  well-known  method  of  certain 
anti-Socialists,  to  show  you  that  certain  of  its  lead- 
ers were  godless  creatures.  Granting  that  all  this  is 
true,  it  proves  absolutely  nothing,  for  Socialism^ 
being  a  movement  concerned  with  the  political  and 


aO  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

economic  problems  of  the  workers  of  the  world,  does 
not  attempt  to  prescribe  a  man's  religious  or  anti- 
religious  views.  If  it  did,  how  could  it  rightly  claim 
to  be  a  world-wide,  democratic  movement?  Did  not 
atheists  exist  long  before  modem  Socialism  was  ever 
dreamt  of?  Have  not  leaders  of  all  the  older  parties 
of  this  country  been  atheists,  agnostics  and  what 
not?  Is  it  not  a  personal  privilege  for  any  man  or 
woman  to  believe  in  and  worship  any  deity,  or  none 
at  all? 

The  only  way  to  prove  that  Socialism  is  against 
religion  is  to  point  out  an  official  document,  accepted 
by  the  membership  as  above  explained.  The  rock- 
bottom  basis  on  which  Socialism  stands  is  interna- 
tional, because  the  ills  which  it  wishes  to  cure  are 
international,  and  not  confined  to  any  particular 
country ;  any  proof  that  Socialism  is  against  religion 
must  therefore  point  to  some  accepted  international 
document  so  stating.  Needless  to  say  this  cannot 
be  done.  And  quite  a&  needless  to  add.  Socialism 
does  not  claim  the  right  to  force  any  member  to  be 
religious  if  his  own  conscience  leads  him  to  different 
attitudes. 

We  may  take  it,  then,  as  a  requirement  of  logic 
and  sincerity,  that  every  opponent  owes  it  to  Truth 
to  combat  Socialism  as  the  Socialists  accept  it,  as 
the  Socialists  define  it  in  their  official  literature^  not 
as  some  enemy  misrepresents  it,  or  some  misunder- 
stander  garbles  it.  If  you  wish  to  fight  Catholicism, 
Buddhism,  Judaism  or  any  other  creed,  fight  it  as  it 
is  authoritatively  defined,  not  with  half-baked  opin- 
ions as  to  what  it  is.  The  same  applies  to  Socialism, 
whether  yoii  are  spreadmg  it  or  opposing  it. 

Four  Phases  of  Socialism.  The  Socialist  Party  is 
founded  for  the  purpose  of  achieving  its  aims  by  the 


PHASES  OF  SOCIALISM  ai 

use  of  the  ballot.  The  conception  of  what  is  to  be 
achieved  rests  upon  certain  facts,  which  may  be 
looked  upon  and  defined  in  four  phases,  of  which  the 
party  itself  is  one.  It  should  be  remembered  that 
these  phases  are  not  the  only  ways  of  looking  upon 
Socialism;  they  represent  convenient  divisions,  for 
the  purpose  of  better  remembering  and  assimilating 
the  ideas  and  the  facts.  They  are  not  necessarily 
independent  of  each  other,  but  are  rather  different 
angles  from  which  the  same  general  symptoms  may 
be  treated. 

First.  Socialism  may  he  looked  upon  as  an  m-  y^^ 
terpretation  of  history.  In  this  field  the  pioneer  (/  / 
work  which  resulted  in  the  final  upbuilding  of  the 
party  was  due  mainly  to  Frederick  Engels  and  Karl 
Marx,  whose  writings  first  made  clear  the  historical 
interpretation  which  is  discussed  at  length  in  Chap- 
ter Two. 

Second.  Socialism  may  he  viewed  as  a  criticism 
of  present  conditions.  In  all  ages  many  wrongs  and 
social  evils  have  been  manifest.  People  cried  out 
against  them,  not  understanding  that  at  bottom  /  "0 )] 
certain  systems  of  social  organization,  rather  than 
individuals,  were  at  fault.  Not  until  the  interpreta- 
tion of  history  out  of  which  Socialism  evolved  did 
people  begin  to  understand  this  important  social 
fact.     This  phase  will  be  treated  in  Chapter  Four. 

Third.  Socialism  may  he  looked  upon  as  a  world- 
ideal.  When  people  see  wrongs  in  society,  and  have 
not  yet  discovered  in  scientific  manner  the  underlying 
causes,  they  take  refuge  in  pictures  of  the  imagina- 
tion. Seeking  to  escape  from  the  world  as  it  is,  they 
invent  worlds  as  they  ought  to  be.  But  these  pic- 
tures of  ideal  Utopias  have  left  their  impress  upon 
social  history,  and  are  not  without  effect  upon  the 


^  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

minds  of  men.  Hence  a  knowledge  of  them  is  needed 
for  a  fuller  appreciation  of  modem  scientific  Social- 
ism.    This  phase  will  be  treated  in  Chapter  Five. 

Fourth.  Socialism  may  he  taken,  and  generally  is, 
in  the  sense  of  a  political  Party,  whose  aims  inter- 
pret, and  are  more  or  less  colored  by,  the  facts  and 
aspirations  of  the  foregoing  phases. 

We  have  now  given  in  fragmentary  outline  the 
material  which  we  shall  presently  explain  in  full.  In 
order  to  call  one's  self  a  Socialist  it  is  not  necessary 
to  believe  all  that  these  several  phases  say  and  im- 
ply; for  such  a  purpose  one  need  only  believe  in  the 
ultimate  program  of  the  political  party.  But  of 
this  more  later ;  enough  for  the  moment  to  insist  that 
to  know  the  question  with  a  thoroughness  which 
makes  your  belief  or  opposition  worthy,  you  must 
view  the  question  in  its  fourfold  aspect:  historical, 
critical,  ideal  and  political. 


CHAPTER  II 

Socialism  as  a  Study  of  Human  Progress  —  Elements  of 
Economic  Determinism  —  Class  Struggles  of  the  Past 

BEFORE  any  constructive  criticism  of  any  eco- 
nomic system  can  be  made,  it  is  not  enough  to 
understand  the  effects  of  that  system.  The  de- 
velopment of  that  system  and  the  causes  of  that 
development  must  be  understood  in  order  to  appre- 
ciate the  soundness  of  its  structure.  And  while  it 
may  be  philosophically  interesting  to  invent  eco- 
nomic systems,  it  is  ridiculous  to  attempt  to  guide 
social  development  unless  the  laws  underlying  that 
development  are  understood.  Socialism  would  never 
rise  above  an  impractical  metaphysical  Utopia  un- 
less this  knowledge  of  human  development  was  un- 
derstood. This  knowledge  is  to  be  obtained  by  a 
critical  study  of  history,  and  only  when  the  knowl- 
edge thus  obtained  is  applied  to  present  conditions 
does  Socialism  become  scientific. 

History  as  ordinarily  written  gives  the  reader  the 
impression  that  the  growth  of  civilization  is  the  re- 
sult of  the  efforts  of  great  men.  Institutions  of  all 
kinds  appear  to  be  the  inventions  of  specially  gifted 
individuals.  If  this  is  true,  then  we  must  look  to 
our  great  men  for  a  solution  of  our  present  day  trou- 
bles. Concerted  action  by  the  mass  thus  appears 
to  be  wasted  effort;  apparently  what  is  needed  is  to 
"  elect  good  men  "  who  will  give  the  masses  what  is 
best  for  them.  The  above  interpretation  of  history 
is  individualistic;  carried  to  its  logical  conclusion  it 

points  to  anarchism  as  an  ideal. 

23 


«4j  ABC  OF  SOCIALISM 

A  thorough  examination  of  facts  shows  that  most 
written  history  suffers  from  the  limited  knowledge 
and  viewpoint  of  historians.  In  recording  history 
they  deal  with  superficialities,  usually  being  una- 
ware of  powerful  hidden  forces  which  are  acting  on 
the  human  race.  Consequently  they  deal  with  effects 
rather  than  with  causes.  Similar  mistakes  were 
made  in  other  branches  of  knowledge.  For  thou- 
sands of  years  people  regarded  illusions  as  facts. 
Thus  they  believed  that  the  sun  moved  around  the 
earth  and  that  the  earth  was  flat.  Certain  chemical 
phenomena  which  puzzled  them  led  them  to  believe 
that  gold  could  be  transformed  from  baser  metals. 
The  development  of  science  showed  the  emptiness  of 
these  views.  Physics  and  chemistry,  and  their  off- 
shoots, taught  us  how  to  interpret  nature  correctly. 
Geology  and  biology,  and  their  developments,  re- 
vealed to  us  the  unwritten  history  of  millions  of 
years,  and  gave  us  the  means  of  learning  what  his- 
torians had  omitted.  We  were  now  able,  for  the 
first  time,  to  separate  written  history  into  two  parts 
—  valuable  and  trivial. 

We  now  know  that  man  first  lived  like  the  animals, 
wandering  around  in  search  of  food.  Economic  ne- 
cessity soon  taught  him  what  it  has  taught  many 
animals:  the  advantages  of  grouping  together. 
Thus  from  economic  conditions  resulted  the  first 
human  institutions  —  the  family  and  the  tribe. 
Along  with  these  changes  there  developed  the  use  of 
primitive  tools  and  the  division  of  labor.  The  men 
devised  tools  to  facilitate  the  catching  of  fish,  and 
weapons  for  hunting  animals.  The  women  prepared 
food,  made  baskets  or  other  utilities,  and  brought  up 
the  children.  What  little  private  property  existed 
was  the  common  property  of  the  tribe,  there  being 


HOW  TO  VIEW  HISTORY  26 

practically  no  claims  of  individual  ownership.  In 
other  words,  the  tribe  was  conducted  on  a  corrmmnistic 
basis. 

When  prehistoric  man  hunted  and  fished  he  could 
not  claim  anything  until  it  was  in  his  possession. 
He  had  no  interest  in  preventing  others  from  hunting 
animals  or  catching  fish.  The  tribe  regarded  the 
cave  which  served  as  home  and  the  direct  products  of 
labor  as  private  property.  But  at  best,  the  institu- 
tion of  private  property  was  in  its  earliest  stages. 

Later  the  tribesmen  learned  to  herd  cattle  and 
finally  to  till  the  soil.  This  economic  change  gave 
rise  to  the  institution  of  private  property  of  land. 
The  tribe  now  paid  particular  attention  to  see  that 
its  herds  were  protected  from  other  tribes  and  that 
its  lands  were  respected  as  private  property. 

We  see,  then,  that  even  in  early  periods  of  our 
race  the  various  institutions  were  the  results  of  eco- 
nomic conditions.  As  these  conditions  changed  there 
were  corresjxvnding  changes  in  the  institutions.  We 
are  thus  led  up  to  the  scientific  method  of  interpret- 
ing history  known  as  the  Materialist  Conception  of 
History.  It  is  also  known  as  Economic  Determmism 
or  the  Economic  Interpretation  of  History.  The 
Materialist  Conception  of  History  teaches  that  the 
basis  of  social  structure  is  to  be  found  in  the  eco- 
nomic conditions  of  the  times.  In  other  words,  the 
social  and  political  institutions  are  determined  by  the 
means  by  which  people  get  a  living. 

THE    CLASS    STRUGGLE 

As  the  methods  of  production  among  the  tribes 
develop,  we  find  certain  groups  and  individuals  en- 
joying greater  advantages  than  others.  Again, 
wars,  which  are  results  of  certain  groups  attempting 


26  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

to  obtain  economic  power  at  the  expense  of  others, 
raise  the  victors  to  power  while  the  conquered  are 
reduced  to  slavery.  Among  the  conquerors  are  in- 
dividuals who  through  custom,  ability,  or  trickery 
acquire  power  at  the  expense  of  society.  Economic 
conditions  have  created  new  structures  in  society. 
We  have  an  aristocracy  dn  the  one  hand  and  chattel 
slavery  on  the  other.  In  other  words,  economic  con- 
ditions develop  classes  with  opposing  interests. 
Henceforth,  the  distinguishing  characteristics  of  a 
given  epoch  are  denoted  by  the  power  and  social  po- 
sition of  the  various  classes.  The  materialist  con- 
ception of  history  reveals  to  us  a  new  view  of  the  lives 
of  nations.  The  history  of  a  nation  becomes  the 
history  of  the  various  classes  of  that  nation,  the 
struggles  of  these  classes  with  each  other,  and  the 
struggles  of  the  ruling  class  of  that  nation  with  the 
ruling  classes  of  other  nations.  The  struggle  be- 
tween the  classes  within  a  nation  is  known  as  7^he 
Class  Struggle.  A  survey  of  history  reveals  this 
struggle  in  all  past  and  modern  nations. 

In  prehistoric  Attica,  in  Greece,  the  nobles  had  the 
exclusive  use  of  the  cities.  The  common  people  were 
compelled  to  live  in  the  country  while  the  nobility 
claimed  the  right  to  all  wealth  and  political  author- 
ity. But  industry  and  commerce  had  in  the  mean- 
time developed.  This  economic  change,  like  previous 
ones,  resulted  in  a  social  change  and  we  find  accord- 
ingly that  a  portion  of  the  commoners  had  now  been 
converted  into  a  wealthy  land-owning  class.  This 
new  class  demanded  a  share  in  the  government  and 
by  the  aid  of  the  poorer  commoners  their  demands 
were  granted.  Economic  conditions  thus  created  a 
new  class,  which  overthrew  the  older  aristocracy,  and 
then  itself  became  the  ruling  class. 


ASPECTS  OF  THE  CLASS  STRUGGLE     27 

At  first  the  landowner  was  contented  with  making 
a  living  for  himself,  his  tenants,  and  his  slaves.  But 
he  soon  found  that  he  could  realize  a  higher  price  by 
shipping  his  goods  to  the  various  colonies.  Since 
the  land  yielded  only  enough  to  support  its  inhabi- 
tants, the  poor  were  plunged  into  debt,  and,  on  being 
unable  to  pay  the  same,  became  slaves.  Here  we  see 
two  classes  arising  from  a  common  origin.  Economic 
conditions  first  made  a  portion  of  the  commoners 
wealthy.  These  then  enlisted  the  aid  of  their  fellow 
commoners  and  secured  control  of  the  government. 
This  control  gave  them  the  use  of  colonies  as  foreign 
markets  and  finally  led  to  the  enslaving  of  the  very 
ones  who  had  placed  them  in  control.  A  struggle 
between  these  new  classes  now  ensued. 

The  former  commoners,  now  slaves,  prepared  for 
armed  resistance.  Violence  was  averted  through  the 
election  of  Solon,  whose  laws  liberated  all  who  were 
in  slavery  for  debt,  and  restored  former  commoners 
to  citizenship. 

The  struggle  of  the  classes  again  changed  its  form. 
The  power  of  the  government  was  so  great  that  the 
citizens  of  Athens,  the  capital  of  Attica,  developed 
into  an  aristocracy.  The  vast  majority  of  the 
people,  who  were  not  citizens,  were  slaves.  Thus  we 
see  a  series  of  class  struggles  forming  the  history  of 
Attica.  Every  time  an  economic  change  took  place 
the  nature  of  the  struggle  changed. 

Turning  to  Roman  History  we  find  another  series 
of  class  struggles  similar  to  those  which  occurred  in 
Greece.  Here  the  aristocrats  are  called  Patricians 
while  the  commoners  are  known  as  Plebeians.  A 
struggle  for  power  ensues  and  results  in  a  portion  of 
the  Plebeians  gaining  political  power.  This  power 
enables  them  to  become  rich  and  new  classes  and  a 


«8  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

struggle  arise.  As  in  Greece  the  struggle  became  one 
between  the  rich  and  poor  and  led  up  to  a  hundred 
years'  revolution. 

Passing  from  Ancient  to  Mediaeval  History  we  find 
again  that  changing  economic  conditions  created 
new  opposing  classes.  Under  Feudalism  we  find  the 
lords,  who  owned  the  various  estates  which  surrounded 
the  village.  Then  there  were  the  workers  who  were 
subdivided  into  freemen  and  serfs.  The  position  of 
the  latter  was  somewhat  better  than  that  of  the 
slave  of  ancient  times.  In  addition  there  were  the 
inhabitants  of  the  towns  who  consisted  essentially  of 
traders  and  handicraft  men.  Indeed,  it  was  the 
trades  which  gave  existence  to  the  towns. 

SOME    CLASS    STRUGGLES    OF    EARLY    ENGLAND 

Economic  changes  were  few  and  far  between  during 
Feudalism,  and  consequently  social  institutions  dur- 
ing this  period  are  noted  for  their  stability.  This 
stability/  was  not  due  to  the  good  qualities  of  the  pre- 
vailing institutions.  On  the  contrary  it  was  the 
result  of  stagnation  in  human  progress.  But  finally 
the  change  did  coTne. 

In  the  years  1348-1350  a  pestilence  (the  Black 
Death)  spread  over  England  and  resulted  in  the 
death  of  about  half  her  population.  From  this  a 
number  of  economic  changes  resulted  which  in  turn 
caused  a  number  of  immediate  and  ultimate  effects. 
The  most  important  of  the  latter  was  the  scarcity  of 
laborers,  which  caused  wages  to  rise.  This  rise  in 
wages  was  strenuously  opposed  by  the  ruling  class, 
and  in  1349,  in  the  midst  of  the  pestilence,  parliament 
passed  a  law  reducing  wages  to  their  former  level. 
This  law  was  reenacted  about  fourteen  times  between 
1351-1444,   but  m  each   case  without   avail.     The 


ASPECTS  OF  THE  CLASS  STRUGGLE     29 

attempts  to  enforce  this  law  only  irritated  the  masses 
and  finally  led  up  to  the  insurrection  known  as  the 
Peasants'  Rebellion. 

We  thus  have  illustrated  an  important  principle 
developed  from  the  materialist  conception  of  history. 
Political  laws  are  effective  only  when  in  accordance 
with  economic  conditions  and  not  when  opposed  to 
them.  This  fact  has  not  as  yet  penetrated  the  heads 
of  our  modern  "  trust  busting  "  and  "  back  to  compe- 
tion  "  statesmen. 

DECAY    OF    FEUDALISM 

The  rise  in  wages  not  only  favored  the  laborers 
but  also  put  the  serfs  in  a  more  favorable  position. 
The  labor  of  the  latter  became  so  highly  valued  that 
they,  too,  were  enabled  to  obtain  important  conces- 
sions from  their  masters.  Before  the  epidemic  the 
serf  spent  over  half  his  time  in  working  for  his 
master,  the  rest  of  the  time  he  spent  in  working  for 
himself,  so  as  to  maintain  himself  and  his  family. 
As  a  result  of  the  Black  Death  landlords  began  to 
let  their  estates  for  a  rental.  Usually  the  person 
who  hired  the  land  was  a  freeman  or  serf.  Since 
such  a  person  had  no  legal  right  over  the  body  of 
the  serf,  a  change  in  the  economic  status  of  the  serfs 
took  place.  Instead  of  serving  time  to  their  feudal 
lord  they  now  paid  a  sum  of  money  to  the  lord  or  his 
representative.  In  other  words  the  serfs  had  become 
tenants.  Serfdom^  the  basis  of  Fetudalism^  was  decay- 
ing^ and  the  superstructure  was  hound  to  topple  over. 
Legally,  the  vast  majority  of  the  people  were  still 
serfs;  practically,  the  laws  were  obsolete.  This 
period  is  now  known  as  the  "  Golden  Age  of  Labor," 
since  at  no  time  was  labor  as  highly  rewarded  as  then. 

The  high  price  of  labor  had  its  effects.     The  ml- 


30  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

ing  class  now  turned  to  sheep-raising,  since  this 
required  comparatively  much  less  labor  than  did 
agriculture.  On  the  other  hand,  the  demand  for  wool 
was  steady,  at  good  prices,  both  within  and  without 
the  country.  This  change  led  to  the  enclosing  of  the 
previously  op^n  fields,  and  the  eviction  of  the  former 
serfs  from  these  fields.  Rents  were  now  high,  the 
country  partially  depopulated,  and  the  vast  majority 
discontented.  Masses  were  unemployed  and  there 
was  a  danger  that  not  enough  grain  would  be  raised 
to  feed  the  population.  On  three  occasions  the  riot- 
ing rose  to  the  heights  of  insurrection,  but  these 
were  suppressed  by  the  government.  Laws  restrict- 
ing enclosing  were  passed  several  times,  but  these 
were  futile.  By  the  close  of  the  sixteenth  century, 
enclosing  had  run  its  course  for  the  time  being. 
Thus  was  the  decay  of  Feudalism  accompanied  by 
its  class  struggle. 

There  were  other  evidences  of  the  decay  of  Feudal- 
ism. The  labor  organizations  of  Feudalism,  the  craft 
guilds,  were  beginning  to  decay.  The  economic  posi- 
tion of  groups  of  members,  particularly  between 
masters  and  journeymen,  were  becoming  antagonistic. 
This  led  to  the  existence  of  journeyman-guilds  which 
did  not  count  masters  among  its  membership.  The 
masters  remaining  in  the  old  guild  again  split,  the 
more  wealthy  being  known  as  the  "  Liveried  Com- 
panies." These  began  to  get  a  firm  foothold  in  the 
government.  A  large  class  of  unorganized  artisans 
sprang  up,  and  finally  the  guilds  were  suppressed  by 
Henry  VIII. 

The  above  economic  changes  transformed  England 
from  an  agricultural  nation  into  a  commercial  one. 
As  may  be  expected,  these  changes  were  accompanied 
by  important  political  and  economic  consequences. 


THE  INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION       31 


THE    INDUSTRIAL    EEVOLUTION 

The  eighteenth  century  finds  England  an  indus- 
trial and  commercial  country.  The  raising  and 
exporting  of  wool  had  enabled  a  small  class  of  people 
to  grow  wealthy ;  on  the  other  hand  the  vast  majority 
of  the  people  had  been  degraded  into  a  miserable 
condition.  The  "  Golden  Age  of  Labor  "  brought 
about  its  own  reaction.  The  labor  guilds  were 
broken  up;  the  peasants  had  been  forced  from  the 
land.  They  no  longer  had  the  guarantee  of  Feudal- 
ism to  eke  out  an  existence.  The  accumulation  of 
wealth  on  the  one  hand  and  the  existence  of  a  large 
mass  of  unemployed  poor  on  the  other,  favored  and 
made  possible  those  industrial  changes  which  finally 
developed  into  the  present  ca,pitalist  system. 

The  first  industrial  development  consisted  of  what 
is  known  as  the  "  Age  of  Manufacture."  At  first 
each  craft  was  assembled  in  the  workrooms  and  each 
man  performed  all  the  operations  necessary  for  the 
complete  production  of  the  finished  goods.  Later, 
specialization  developed,  and  each  worker  performed 
only  a  part  of  the  work  necessary  for  the  production 
of  the  product.  Thus,  production  became  social, 
and  one  of  the  distinguishing  characteristics  of 
Modern  Industry  was  established. 

At  about  this  time  the  taking  of  interest,  which 
heretofore  had  been  illegal,  was  made  lawful.  While 
economic  activity  was  confined  to  the  soil,  there  was 
but  little  chance  for  the  loaning  of  money  on  interest 
—  such  loans  being  practically  confined  to  traders. 
When,  however,  manufacture  came  to  play  an  im- 
portant economic  role,  we  find  that  the  payment  of 
interest  developed  even  before  it  was  legalized.  In- 
deed, the  legalizing  of  interest  taking  is  a  splendid 


32  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

example  of  economic  determinism.  The  Feudal  laws, 
the  teachings  of  the  Bible  as  well  as  other  texts  re- 
garded the  taking  of  interest  as  wrong;  but  this 
once  universally  accepted  doctrine  had  to  change 
with  a  change  in  the  means  of  production.  The 
taking  of  interest  is  thus  a  result  of  the  development 
of  capitalism,  and  not  a  cause  of  it.  ^ 

Aided  by  the  immigration  of  foreign  artisans,  the 
manufacture  of  cloth  grew  to  be  England's  leading 
industry.  The  demand  for  cotton  and  woolen  goods 
soon  grew  to  be  far  greater  than  the  methods  of  pro- 
duction could  possibly  supply.  Economic  conditions 
called  for  improvements  of  the  process  of  manufac- 
ture and  these  improvements  were  forthcoming.  In 
1764  Hargreaves  invented  his  "  Spinning-jenny " 
which  soon  displaced  the  spinning-wheel.  Then  Ark- 
wright,  perhaps  anticipating  modem  captains  of 
industry,  stole  another's  invention  and  claimed  it  as 
his  own.  This  invention  made  a  still  greater  im- 
provement in  spinning.  These  improvements  in  the 
manufacture  of  thread  opened  the  road  for  improve- 
ments in  the  art  of  weaving,  and  inventions  from 
1784«  and  onward  met  this  demand.  The  power-loom 
in  the  meantime  was  developed  by  Cartwright. 
These  improvements,  and  particularly  the  applica- 
tion of  power,  called  for  a  more  abundant  supply  of 
raw  materials.  The  obstacle  in  the  way  was  the  old 
process  of  separating  the  cotton  fiber  from  its  seed, 
and  this  was  solved  by  Whitney's  invention  of  the 
cotton-gin.  At  the  same  time  other  industries  de- 
veloped, particularly  the  iron  industries  and  coal- 
mining. 

In  the  above  industrial  changes  we  see  the  play  of 
economic  forces.  Inventions  were  not  forthcoming 
untU  economic  conditions  were  ripe  for  them.     This 


THE  INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION       33 

fact  opens  our  eyes  to  a  social  factor  present  in  dis- 
coveries and  inventions  that  is  apt  to  be  overlooked. 
It  gives  society  a  claim  that  far  overshadows  those 
of  the  individual  who,  as  inventor,  is  merely  a  tool 
of  social  forces. 

Previously  all  manufacture  was  conducted  in  the 
home,  the  finished  goods  being  collected  from  house 
to  house.  The  application  of  power  to  the  instru- 
ments of  production  soon  put  an  end  to  this.  In  the 
first  place,  the  home  could  not  accommodate  the  large 
machinery;  again,  this  machinery  was  too  expensive 
for  the  average  weaver  to  obtain.  In  other  words, 
the  modern  factory  system  was  also  predetermined 
by  economic  conditions.  All  the  essential  features 
of  this  system  were  developed  in  the  comparatively 
short  period  of  forty  years  (1760-1800).  This 
development  of  industry  was  so  sudden,  and  in  such 
marked  contrast  to  the  previous  system  that  it  hag 
been  called  "  The  Industrial  Revolution." 

The  Feudal  lord  has  no  place  in  this  system ;  birth 
is  of  no  account  unless  it  is  accompanied  by  cash. 
The  owners  of  the  "  capital  invested  "  are  the  new 
rulers.  Masses  of  laborers,  previously  scattered, 
are  now  gathered  together  in  strictly  regulated 
establishments.  Previously  the  laborer  owned  the 
tools  with  which  he  worked.  Now  the  tools  have  de- 
veloped into  machines  and  are  no  longer  his  property. 
Before,  tJie  laborer  took  his  means  of  production  to 
his  work;  now  the  laborer  must  come  to  the  machine 
before  he  can  work.  His  individual  work  now  repre- 
sents an  almost  negligible  portion  of  all  the  human 
effort  necessary  to  produce  even  a  single  piece  of 
goods.  Goods,  in  turn,  become  conmiodities,  that  is, 
they  are  now  produced  for  sale  instead  of  being  made 
for  direct  consumption. 


84  ABC  OF  SOCIALISM 


POLITICAL    CHANGES 

The  revolution  in  industry  brought  about,  in  turn, 
a  revolution  in  Politics.  In  England  the  changes  in 
the  form  of  government  were  not  marked,  but  the 
change  in  substance  was  truly  revolutionary.  In 
France,  on  the  other  hand,  similar  causes  led  to 
similar  results,  but  here  Feudalism  did  not  die  with- 
out bloodshed.  Economic  conditions  had  decreed 
the  death  of  Feudalism,  and  a  stubborn  attempt  to 
keep  it  alive  after  it  had  outlived  its  usefulness 
brought  about  needless  violence.  And  to-day  the 
ruling  class  attempts  to  keep  alive  an  economic  sys- 
tem that  has  outlived  its  usefulness.  Socialists  with 
their  demand  for  a  change  point  to  the  bloody  French 
conflicts  as  a  warning  of  what  may  happen  if  proper 
changes  are  not  soon  made.  All  people  suffer  by 
such  clashes,  and  it  is  such  reigns  of  terror  that 
Socialists  want  to  avert  by  the  adoption  of  their  plat- 
forms. 

Political  law  lags  hehi/nd  economic  development; 
consequently  we  find  England  at  the  end  of  the 
eighteenth  century  trying  to  uphold  Feudal  laws 
under  Capitalism.  The  Feudal  government  exercised 
a  strict  control  over  laborers,  their  conditions  and 
compensation.  This  control  is  out  of  place  under 
Capitalism.  The  factory  system  under  private 
ownership  demands  a  flexible  supply  of  labor.  Ac- 
cordingly, laws  that  fixed  buying,  selling,  apprentice- 
ship, working  conditions,  etc.,  worked  a  hardship  on 
the  new  master  class.  Consequently  a  new  idea  of 
freedom  was  soon  preached.  This  idea  forms  the 
basis  of  modem  individualism.  This  new  theory  of 
freedom,^    known    as    the    Laissez-faire    (let    alone) 

iThis    is    an    illustration    of   the    application    of   the   Ma- 


THE  POLITICAL  REVOLUTION         36 

theory,  was  presented  as  the  only  salvation  of  man  on 
earth.  Numerous  laws,  well-established  by  time, 
custom,  and  precedent  soon  went  to  pieces  and  our 
modem  ideas  of  government  underwent  changes. 
Now  in  order  to  get  full  power  and  open  the  way  for 
their  economic  progress  it  was  necessary  for  the 
manufacturers  and  business  men  to  get  control  of 
the  government.  This  control  was  gradually  ob- 
tained, having  its  start  when  the  "  Liveried  Com- 
panies," already  mentioned,  obtained  offices.  This 
move  for  political  power  was  naturally  opposed  by 
the  conservatives  (nobles  and  other  upholders  of 
Feudalism).  The  working  class  naturally  sided  with 
the  new  class  (known  as  Bourgeoisie)  against  the 
aristocracy  and  threw  their  strength  of  numbers 
with  the  rising  Capitalist  class.  Accordingly,  when 
the  Bourgeoisie  won  the  victory  predetermined  by 
economic  conditions,  the  working  class  was  in  a  posi- 
tion to  demand  and  obtain  the  ballot,  a  weapon  which. 
Socialism  teaches,  will  enable  the  workers  in  their 
turn  to  get  control  of  the  government  and  work  out 
their  own  salvation. 

What  happened  in  England  was  duplicated  wher- 
ever the  factory  system  was  installed.  Feudalism  was 
completely  crushed.  A  new  class,  in  its  time  decid- 
edly revolutionary,  now  ruled;  a  new  subject  class 
also  arose.  These  two  classes  constitute  the  two 
great  antagonists  in  the  Modern  Class  Struggle. 

We  have  seen,  in  a  hurried  review  of  history,  that 
the  vital  source  of  social  and  political  institutions 
lies  in  the  economic  activities  of  the  hunian  race. 
We  learn   that  thus  far  political  government  has 

terialist  Conception  of  History.  We  see  here  that  new  ideas 
are  eflFects  and  not  causes  of  social  changes.  The  cause  of 
such  changes  are  economic  and  social  in  character. 


Se  ABC  OF  SOCIALISM 

always  been  an  instrument  of  the  ruling  class.  That 
class  must,  however,  give  way  when  economic  condi- 
tions change.  The  forms  of  that  change  and  the 
conditions  under  which  it  takes  place  depend  upon 
the  intelligence  of  the  people.  Governments  must 
•fit  the  economic  conditions  which  surround  them. 
We  also  saw  that  no  class  obtained  power  until  it 
had  at  first  got  possession  of  the  government.  Thus 
the  Materialist  Conception  of  History  emphasizes 
the  prime  importance  of  the  working  class  organizing 
into  a  political  party.  Again,  our  review  of  history 
teaches  us  that  the  progress  of  the  world  came  about 
by  means  of  the  lower  social  classes  rising  to  a  posi- 
tion of  power.  Accordingly,  the  working  class  of 
to-day  must  depend  on  themselves  alone;  they  must 
not  expect  permanent  relief  from  the  "  higher 
classes."  The  next  step  of  progress  must  come  from 
them ;  it  can  come  from  no  other  class.  Again,  when 
a  change  does  occur  the  people  must  be  ripe  for  it, 
if  needless  suffering  is  to  be  avoided.  With  these 
views  in  mind  the  Socialist  Parties  of  the  world  an- 
nounce their  programs.  This  international  organ- 
ization recognizes  that  the  truth  will  make  the  world 
free ;  and  hence  it  is  always  busy  with  its  propaganda 
of  teaching  the  whole  truth. 


CHAPTER  III 

The  Modern  Class  Struggle  —  Present  Economic  Classes  — 
Modern  Government  —  Economic  Basis  of  War 

WE  saw,  in  the  previous  chapter,  that  Eco- 
nomic Determinism  reveals  to  us  that  the 
internal  history  of  a  nation  is  the  history 
of  the  class  struggles  of  that  nation.  Now  it  is  a 
comparatively  easy  task  to  distinguish  between  the 
various  classes  in  previous  periods.  In  fact,  as  we 
have  seen,  former  governments  were  nothing  but  the 
instruments  of  the  ruling  classes  for  keeping  the 
lower  classes  in  subjection. 

We  also  saw  that  the  beginnings  of  modern  gov- 
ernment are  merely  a  development  of  former  class 
struggles.  Are  our  present  governments  also  class 
governments,  as  were  all  previous  ones?  If  they 
are,  we  must  be  able  to  show  not  only  the  existence 
of  antagonistic  classes,  but  we  must  also  show  that 
the  government  is  maintained  for  the  benefit  of  one 
of  these  classes.  This  is  not  so  easy  to  show  as  in 
the  case  of  previous  class  struggles.  By  viewing  the 
past  we  get  a  perspective  scene;  passing  temporary 
effects  are  not  magnified  in  importance.  But  in 
viewing  present  history  we  are  apt  to  overemphasize 
the  importance  of  superficial  changes,  while  we  over- 
look the  fundamental  but  hidden  forces  that  are 
shaping  our  future.  Again,  if  there  is  a  ruling  class, 
the  idea  of  a  class  struggle  would  naturally  be  repug- 
nant to  them,  and  hence  they  would  do  their  best  to 
make  all  believe  that  there  are  no  classes,  for  at  best 
all  ruling  classes  rule  by  consent  of  the  lower  classes ; 

37 


38  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

and  as  long  as  the  latter  are  unconscious  of  this  rule, 
the  class  struggle  is  hidden  and  the  power  of  the 
master  class  is,  apparently,  not  menaced. 

An  examination  of  modern  laws  shows  on  the  face 
of  it  that  modern  government  stands  preeminently 
for  two  things  —  the  protection  of  life  and  property. 
Of  these  two  the  protection  of  life  occupies  a  decidedly 
inferior  position.  Almost  all  of  our  legislative  and 
judicial  activities  are  concerned  with  property  rela- 
tions. With  partial  exceptions  to  murder  in  pas- 
sion, the  taking  of  life  is  a  result  of  property  rela- 
tions, that  is,  murders  are  usually  committed  for  the 
purpose  of  material  gain.  On  the  surface  it  appears 
that  all  classes  are  equally  protected  in  this  respect. 
We  know,  however,  that  as  a  general  rule  there  is 
little  that  can  be  gained  by  the  murder  of  a  poor 
person,  since  this  class  possesses  no  private  prop- 
erty.^ Hence  the  laws  against  murder,  which  appear 
on  the  surface  to  be  proofs  for  the  non-existence  of 
classes,  show  on  analysis  that  they  are  the  results 
of  class  rule. 

Now  it  can  be  truthfully  said  that  these  laws  are 
equally  enforced,  but  that  should  not  blind  us  to  the 
class  character  of  these  laws.  Our  laws  against 
murder  apply  only  to  murders  committed  in  certain 
waySy  m  fact  the  ways  that  they  would  he  committed 
against  the  rich.  About  once  in  every  fifteen 
minutes,  recent  statistics  show,  a  worker  is  murdered 

1  The  expression  private  property  is  here  used  in  the  sense 
generally  accepted  by  Socialists,  that  is,  wealth  which  yields 
an  income  or  pleasures  afforded  other  than  by  the  necessities  of 
life.  In  this  sense  a  person's  tooth  brush,  clothing,  kitchen 
furnishings,  etc.,  do  not  constitute  private  property.  Op- 
ponents of  Socialism  generally  fail  to  take  note  of  this 
distinction,  and  hence  one  of  their  objections  to  Socialism  is 
based  on  their  own  ignorance  rather  than  on  the  weakness  of 
the  proposed  change. 


MODERN  CLASSES  39 

in  our  industries.  Our  laws  do  not  apply  to  this 
class  of  murders  because  the  wealthy  are  not  mur- 
dered this  way.  Hence  the  class  character  of  our 
laws  protecting  life. 

The  laws  dealing  with  the  protection  of  life  are, 
however,  negligible  when  dealing  with  property  rela- 
tions and  the  protection  of  private  property.     Here 
again,   the  laws   as   they  read  appear  to  show  the 
absence   of   classes;    analysis,   however,   proves    the 
opposite  to  be  true.     There  would  be  no   need  of 
laws  protecting  private  property  unless  it  was  to  the 
interest  of  existing  groups  to  seize  the  property  of 
others.     With  some  exceptions,  it  is  an  advantage 
to  the  propertyless  to  seize  the  private  property  of 
the  wealthy.     In  other  words,  modem  laws  reveal^ 
the  presence  of  two  classes  with  opposing  interests  —  / 
a  non-working  property-owning  class  and  property  J 
less  working  class. 

THE    CAPITALIST    CLASS 

It  is  not  necessary  to  go  deeply  into  the  motives  of 
our  laws  to  reveal  the  existence  of  classes.  There 
are  a  number  of  characteristics  of  each  class  that  are 
recognized  by  every  intelligent  person.  Again,  in 
every  large  city  in  this  country  there  is  published 
what  is  known  as  the  "  Blue  Book."  This  book  is  an 
index  of  the  "  social  elect,"  more  popularly  known  as 
"  exclusive  society."  The  characteristics  of  this 
class  of  society  are  too  well  known  to  require  extended 
description.  The  individuals  comprising  this  group 
do  not  live  in  the  slums  nor  work  in  the  factories. 
They  derive  their  income  from  private  property, 
that  is,  capital,  and  hence  are  members  of  the  capital- 
ist class.  But  few  take  an  active  part  in  industry, 
and  most  of  these  are  active  not  in  the  production  of 


4fO  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

goods  but  in  the  protection  and  distribution  of  the 
profits  derived  from  industry.  This  is  the  function 
which  apologists  for  the  present  system  have  named 
"  executive  ability  "  and  "  superior  brains."  So- 
cially, the  members  of  the  capitalist  class  consider 
themselves  separated  by  an  unattainable  height  from 
the  "  common  herd  " ;  hence  their  exclusiveness.  To 
emphasize  their  superiority  they  proudly  mingle 
with  and  marry  into  the  nobility  of  monarchial  gov- 
ernments. The  members  of  this  class  are  the  first  to 
maintain  that  there  are  no  classes  in  this  country, 
yet  when  organized  labor  demands  the  enactment  of 
an  eight  hour  law,  the  members  of  the  capitalist  class 
are  the  first  to  denounce  the  law  on  the  grounds  that 
it  constitutes  class  legislation.  Apparently,  they 
do  not  stop  to  consider  that  there  can  be  no  class 
legislation  without  the  existence  of  classes. 

THE    MIDDUE    CLASS 

This  class  is  complex  in  character.  It  includes 
the  professional  element,  as  teachers,  doctors,  law- 
yers, etc.  In  addition,  groups  of  comparatively  well 
paid  wage  workers,  like  engineers,  foremen  of  factory 
departments,  workers  who  are  in  charge  of  the  super- 
intending of  modern  industry,  etc.,  are  also  reckoned 
as  members  of  this  class.  Another  group  of  the 
middle  class  consists  of  shop-keepers  and  small  busi- 
ness men.  The  income  of  this  last  group  is  double 
in  character.  A  part  of  it  is  wages  due  for  useful 
work  performed  in  managing  an  establishment;  the 
remainder  is  a  return  on  capital  invested.  This 
entire  income  appears  to  this  group  as  "  profit,"  for- 
getting that  their  own  labor  has  a  value  which  should 
be  reckoned  as  an  expense.  Hence  this  group,  as  a 
general  rule,  believes  that  profit  constitutes  "  wages 


MODERN  CLASSES  4fl 

of  superintendence."     (See  Part  II). 

In  order  to  maintain  their  economic  position,  most 
members  of  this  class  must  stand  in  the  good  graces 
of  the  capitalist  class.  Consequently,  they  share  the 
views  of  that  class  in  reference  to  the  class  struggle. 
This  similarity  in  point  of  view  is  also  strengthened 
by  the  fact  that  a  portion  of  the  income  of  this  class 
represents  surplus-value.  In  the  class  struggle 
proper  this  class  plays  a  sensational,  though  almost 
negligible  part.  It  is  the  first  to  feel  the  effects  of 
organized  labor  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  combina- 
tion of  capital  on  the  other.  The  ablest  upholders 
of  capitalism  come  from  this  class. 

On  the  other  hand,  this  class  furnishes  a  great  por- 
tion of  the  Socialist  leaders.  The  educational  possi- 
bilities open  to  this  class  are  generally  closed  to  the 
working  class.  Consequently  members  of  the  mid- 
dle class  are  in  a  position  to  obtain  a  thorough  grasp 
of  Socialism  and  hence  become  leaders.  Too  fre- 
quently is  the  middle  class  environment  reflected  in 
such  leaders ;  their  lack  of  a  workingman's  actual 
experience  in  the  class  struggle  many  times  leads  them 
to  extremes.  On  the  one  hand  some  of  them  confuse 
Socialism  with  reform  measures,  while  on  the  other 
hand  many  of  them  advocate  the  violent  reactionary 
methods  endorsed  by  the  most  rabid  element  in  the 
I.  W.  W.  However,  there  are  some  members  of  the 
middle  class  who  can  cast  aside  their  middle  class 
characteristics  by  close  contact  with  working  people. 
Their  education  then  becomes  a  power  for  the  Social- 
ist movement.  It  is  from  such  of  the  middle  class 
that  are  furnished  types  like  Marx,  Engels,  Bebel, 
Hillquit,  etc. 

In  addition  to  the  middle  class  a  small  portion  of 
the  working  class  like  to  pretend  that  they  are  mem- 


4d  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

bers  of  the  middle  class.  This  applies  particularly 
to  bank  clerks,  bookkeepers,  office  and  store  em- 
ployees, etc.  As  a  general  rule  these  groups  are  a 
poorly  paid  set  of  individuals  who  imagine  themselves 
superior  to  the  working  class.  Their  ludicrous  at- 
tempts to  imitate  their  employers  in  dress,  speech, 
and  thought  make  them  the  laughing  stock  of  all 
classes. 

THE    WORKING    CLASS 

The  existence  of  classes  is  forcibly  demonstrated 
by  those  labor  disturbances  known  as  strikes.  On 
one  side  are  distinctly  arrayed  the  employers ;  on 
the  other  side  are  the  members  of  the  working  class. 
The  discontent  lies  wholly  with  the  latter.  When 
the  strike  is  finally  settled,  it  is  they  who  must  be  at 
the  bench  or  machine  when  the  factory  whistle  blows. 
These  people  do  not  own  private  yachts  or  country 
estates.  Most  of  them  have  never  seen  a  stock 
certificate  or  bond.  They  do  not  deal  with  these 
because  they  do  not  get  their  living  that  way.  They 
get  their  living  from  wages  and  as  the  capitalist 
desires  a  higher  rate  of  dividends  so  does  the  modern 
workingman  desire  a  higher  rate  of  wages.  And  it 
is  about  these  two  conflicting  desires  that  the  modem 
class  struggle  takes  place. 

If,  as  the  capitalist  class  claims,  the  interest  of  the 
employer  and  his  employees  are  identical,  the  former 
should  rejoice  in  the  willingness  of  the  workers  to 
receive  higher  wages.  For,  by  paying  higher  wages 
the  condition  of  the  workers  will  be  bettered,  and 
since  the  interests  of  both  groups  are  identical,  the 
capitalist  class  would  automatically  receive  its  re- 
ward. We  know,  however,  that  no  capitalists  (not 
even  insane  ones )  believe  this  —  hence  the  existence 


SURPLUS  VALUE  48 

of  strikes.  This  leads  us  to  a  fundamental  principle 
of  Socialism  known  as  Surplus  Value.  It  is  this 
surplus  value  which  forms  the  basis  of  the  modem 
class  struggle. 

SURPLUS    VALUE 

All  wealth,  that  is,  economic  goods  which  satisfy 
human  wants,  are  the  result  of  the  application  of 
labor  to  the  materials  and  forces  of  nature.  Our 
machines,  tools,  chairs,  vegetables,  books,  etc.,  are  the 
result  of  the  application  of  mental  and  physical  labor 
to  land  and  the  forces  of  nature.  The  workers,  men- 
tal as  well  as  physical,  do  not  receive  all  that  is  pro- 
duced. Land  and  the  forces  of  nature  do  not  require 
payment  for  their  services.  The  workers  get  back 
as  wages  only  a  part  of  what  they  produce.  The 
equivalent  of  that  part  of  their  product  which  they 
do  not  receive  is  called  surplus  value.  Hence,  the 
higher  the  wages  are,  the  lower  is  the  surplus  value, 
and  vice  versa.  Now  this  surplus  value  forms  the 
fund  from  which  profit,  rent,  and  interest  are  paid.^ 
Surplus  value  is  then  unpaid  labor,  and  hence  the 
source  of  wealth  of  non-workers  comes  from  the  un- 
paid labor  of  workers. 

In  spite  of  the  fact  that  all  wealth  is  created  by 
labor  the  workers  are  poor  even  in  the  times  of  our 
greatest  prosperity.  The  workers  consider  them- 
selves lucky  at  all  times  if  they  are  "  making  a  liv- 
ing." But  the  serfs  were  able  to  do  this  centuries 
ago,  long  before  the  creation  of  labor-saving  machin- 
ery. In  other  words,  in  spite  of  all  the  workers  pro- 
duce, they  get  back,  on  the  average,  merely  enough 
to  live  on.  The  remainder  —  surplus  value  —  goes 
to  the  capitalist  class.     Exceedingly  few  become  rich 

2  For  the  economic  aspects  of  surplus  value  see  Part  II. 


4f4  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

from  doing  useful  work.  Even  in  those  exceptional 
cases  where  poor  people  become  rich  it  will  be  found 
that  the  accumulation  of  wealth  takes  place  at  an 
appreciable  rate  only  when  useful  work  has  been 
stopped  and  substituted  by  the  receiving  of  surplus 
value  in  the  form  of  profit,  rent,  or  interest.  In  this 
connection  let  us  remember  that  while  the  operations 
connected  with  the  receiving  of  surplus  value  in  the 
form  of  rent,  interest  or  profit  may  be  time-consum- 
ing, they  represent  a  non-productive  expenditure  of 
human  labor  and  hence  produce  no  value.  In  other 
words,  the  wealth  created  by  the  workers,  including 
useful  brain  workers  of  the  middle  class,  is  divided 
into  two  great  divisions.  The  value  going  to  the 
members  of  the  working  class  ^  in  the  form  of  wages 
forms  only  one  of  these  divisions.  The  unpaid  labor 
of  the  workers  forms  the  other  division,  known  as 

E surplus  value.  In  other  words,  the  workers  do  not 
get  the  ftdl  social  product  of  their  labor. 

By  the  full  social  product  of  labor  is  not  meant 
that  a  man  should  receive  the  particular  commodfties 
that  he  has  himself  actually  produced.  Instead  of 
being  paid  in  commodities  what  is  meant  is  that  he 
should  receive  the  value  (equivalent)  of  what  he  has 
produced.  Nor  is  it  meant  that  a  shoemaker  who 
makes  shoes  from  leather  should  receive  a  reward 
for  the  leather  in  the  shoes.  That  should  go  to  the 
producer  of  the  leather.  We  know  that  any  com- 
modity has  always  a  value  greater  than  that  of  the 
raw  materials  contained  therein.  This  increase  in 
value  is  entirely  due  to  labor.     The  workers  who  per- 

3  It  is  curious  to  note  that  by  the  words  "  working  class  "  is 
understood  the  class  that  produces  useful  things.  Members  of 
the  capitalist  class  insist  that  they  are  not  parasites  on  society, 
but  nevertheless  would  strenuously  object  to  being  called  mem- 
bers of  the  working-class! 


MODERN  GOVERNMENT  46 

formed  this  labor  did  not  receive  in  wages  this  in- 
crease in  value y  hut  distinctly/  less.  What  they  did 
not  so  receive  constituted  surplus  value.  If  the 
workers  received  the  full  social  product  of  their  labor 
there  could  be  no  surplus  value,  and  hence  no  profit, 
rent  ^  or  interest. 


We  have  seen  that  in  previous  class  struggles  the 
government  was  essentially  the  instrument  of  the 
master  class.  Furthermore,  no  subordinate  class 
obtained  power  until  it  had  seized  (not  necessarily 
forcibly)  the  powers  of  government.  The  begin- 
nings of  modern  government  were  similar,  and  under 
modern  government  there  are  social  classes.  Is,  then, 
modern  government  a  government  of  the  rich  class, 
and  is  a  poorer  economic  class  attempting  to  obtain 
possession  of  that  government? 

The  previous  analysis  of  our  laws  shows  their  class 
character,  but  there  are  other  evidences  of  the  class 
character  of  modem  government.  Every  modem 
nation  sends  representatives  (consuls,  ministers,  em- 
bassadors, etc.)  to  every  other  nation.  The  purpose 
of  these  officials  is  to  represent  the  nation's  interests 
abroad,  we  are  told.  But  examination  shows  that 
no  nation  has  interests  as  such.  These  "  interests  " 
are  the  possessions  and  claims  of  rich  individuals  or 
groups^  and  it  is  these  interests  which  the  representa- 
tives look  after.  The  working  class  of  any  nation 
have  no  such  interests  and  accordingly  these  repre- 

4  See  Part  II  for  the  sense  in  which  rent  is  used  in  economic 
discussions. 

5  By  Modern  Government  are  included  such  governments  as 
England,  France,  Germany,  the  United  States,  etc.,  i.e.,  those 
governments  where  the  factory  system  constitutes  the  prevailing 
mode  of  industry. 


46  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

sentatives  are  of  little  interest  to  them.  In  other 
words,  the  representatives  of  one  nation  to  another 
are  the  agents  of  the  capitalist  class  of  those  nations. 
When  these  representatives  cannot  come  to  terms 
regarding  their  various  "  interests,"  war  results. 
Hence  war  is  due  to  the  clash  of  interests  between  the 
ruling  classes  of  the  different  nations. 

Thus,  not  so  long  ago,  private  interests  in  Vene- 
zuela owed  money  to  other  private  interests  in 
Europe.  The  former  being  unable  or  unwilling  to 
pay,  the  latter  complained  to  their  respective  gov- 
ernments, which  in  turn  threatened  war  on  Venezuela. 
Here  the  United  States  came  in  with  its  Monroe 
Doctrine  and  the  affair  was  settled  by  this  govern- 
ment collecting  the  debt.  Thus  this  government  had 
the  inestimable  honor  of  becoming  the  collection 
agency  of  foreign  capitalists  against  South  Ameri- 
can debtors. 

Our  Spanish-American  war  was  a  similar  blot  in 
our  history.  A  number  of  wealthy  Americans  (now 
known  as  the  Sugar  Trust)  had  invested  money  in 
Cuban  sugar  lands.  By  so  doing  they  came  into 
competition  with  Spanish  capitalists  who  used  the 
powers  of  their  government  to  secure  a  monopoly  of 
the  labor  supply.  Thereupon  our  own  government 
was  appealed  to  on  the  grounds  that  "  American 
interests "  were  endangered,  and  the  Battleship 
Maine  was  sent  to  Cuba  at  the  demands  of  these 
"  interests."  In  the  meantime  the  jingoistic  spirit 
was  aroused  in  the  ignorant,  and  an  explosion  aboard 
the  Maine  was  made  the  pretext  for  war.  It  thus 
becomes  evident  how  the  Spanish-American  war  was 
a  war  for  the  benefit  of  the  capitalist  class.  The 
sugar  interests  demanded  that  their  land  be  made 
profitable  and  this  government  fought  Spain,  which 


FOREIGN  MARKETS  AND  WAR         47 

naturally  preferred  Spanish  capitalists  to  American 
ones.  The  important  results  of  the  war  were  great 
financial  gains  for  American  capitalists.  The  sugar 
interests  got  their  supply  of  cheap  foreign  labor 
(they  would  not  even  hire  the  very  Americans  who 
fought  for  them)  and  developed  into  the  Sugar  Trust. 
Thus  do  we  see  the  class  character  of  our  own  gov- 
ernment. 

One  of  the  greatest  activities  of  modern  govern- 
ments is  the  securing  of  foreign  markets.  Now 
modern  governments  as  such  have  nothing  to  sell,  hwt 
the  capitalist  class  of  every  modem  government  hus. 

Hence  in  searching  for  foreign  markets  modern 
governments  become  merely  agents  for  their  respec- 
tive capitalist  classes.  By  our  ambassadors,  minis- 
ters, and  special  commissions  we  try  to  find  markets 
where  our  capitalists  may  sell  their  goods,  and  when 
sold,  enforce  payments  of  the  debts  so  incurred,  using 
the  army  and  navy  if  necessary.  This  government^ 
however,  does  not  search  for  markets  where  American 
unemployed  workvngmen  may  receive  high  wages. 
Now  we  can  understand  what  Socialists  mean  when 
they  say  that  modern  government  is  an  instrument  of 
the  capitalist  class. 

The  war  between  the  Allies  on  the  one  hand  and 
Germany  and  Austria  on  the  other  also  illustrates 
the  class  character  of  modem  government.  Eng- 
land and  Germany  were  the  leading  industrial  nations 
of  Europe.  The  capitalists  of  England  thus  found 
themselves  in  keen  competition  with  German  capital- 
ists for  the  world  market.  This  competition  was 
naturally  transferred  to  the  instruments  of  these 
classes,  namely  —  their  respective  governments. 
Again,  Germany  had  also  in  her  neighbors  France 
and  Russia  two  nations  whose  ruling  classes  could 


48  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

materially  profit  at  her  expense.  Hence  the  triple 
alliance  of  England,  France,  and  Russia.  On  the 
other  hand  Austria  was  always  menaced  by  Russia; 
hence  her  taking  sides  with  Germany.  This  com- 
petition between  the  ruling  classes  of  the  nations  led 
to  the  maintenance  of  large  military  and  naval  forces. 
The  assassination  of  an  Austrian  noble  and  the  sur- 
rounding events  were  not  the  causes  of  the  war,  hwt 
rather  the  pretext  and  signal  for  it.  Certainly 
France  would  not  fight  Germany  because  a  Servian 
killed  an  Austrian  noble.  The  economic  competition 
between  the  ruling  classes  of  Europe  had  produced 
such  strained  relations  that  any  slight  irregularity 
was  sufficient  to  set  the  nations  at  each  other. 

And  the  capitalists  of  our  own  country  love  foreign 
markets  just  as  intensely  as  do  the  capitalists  of 
European  nations.  This  desire  is  reflected  in  the 
activities  of  this  nation  trying  to  get  foreign  markets, 
those  of  South  America  in  particular.  But  in  our 
haste  to  get  this  market  we  fail  to  see  beyond  our 
noses.  English,  German,  French,  and  other  capital- 
ists have  just  as  great  an  appetite  for  South  Ameri- 
can markets  as  have  our  own  capitalists.  This 
competition  will  be  transferred  to  the  respective  gov- 
ernments, and  unless  we  can  display  more  sound 
sense  and  less  statesmanship  than  heretofore,  we  may 
find  ourselves  on  the  verge  of  war.  Then  our  jingoes 
(some  people  call  them  "patriots")  will  cry  about 
"  endangered  American  interests  "  and  Ex-President 
Taft's  "  friendly  nations  "  will  become  "  our  ever- 
lasting foe."  Workingmen  will  then  be  called  to 
enlist  and  fight  the  battles  of  the  capitalist  class, 
who  will  exercise  their  "  executive  ability  "  by  stay- 
ing at  home. 

Thus   far,  we  have  treated  some  of  the  leading 


FOREIGN  MARKETS  AND  WAR         49 

characteristics  of  the  foreign  policies  of  modem  gov- 
ernments and  found  that  they  were  for  the  direct 
benefit  of  the  capitalist  class.  Also  that  the  wars 
between  nations  are  the  differences  of  the  capitalist 
classes  of  those  nations,  which  are  settled  hy  the 
lives  of  the  working  people.  An  examination  of  the 
interior  workings  of  modern  government  will  show 
that  here  too  modern  government  is  essentially  an 
instrument  of  the  capitalist  class. 

A  study  of  the  founding  of  our  government  shows 
its  class  character.  From  Ex-President  Madison 
(one  of  the  founders  of  the  government)  we  learn 
that  the  constitution  was  intentionally  framed  so  as 
to  keep  the  powers  of  government  away  from  the 
people.  The  representatives  to  the  Constitutional 
Convention  were  men  with  large  property  interests. 
The  Articles  of  Confederation  did  not  adequately 
serve  their  interests  and  hence  the  new  assembly. 
As  a  result  the  senators  were  not  to  be  elected  by  the 
people  and  the  system  of  judges  was  altogether 
removed  from  the  people's  control.  The  delegates 
agreed  that  property  was  the  main  function  of  gov- 
ernment and  that  accordingly  property  owners 
should  rule.  It  must  be  said  to  the  credit  of  Madi- 
son that  he  warned  the  assembly  that  the  nature  of 
government  could  change,  a  change  that  Socialists 
are  trying  to  bring  about. 

To-day  our  Constitution  is  still  the  authority  of 
our  government.  But  aside  from  this  we  can  easily 
see  the  class  character  of  it  in  its  domestic  affairs. 
In  the  constitutional  convention  Gouverneur  Morris 
declared  as  follows :  "  Life  and  liberty  were  gener- 
ally said  to  be  of  more  value  than  property.  An 
accurate  view  of  the  matter  would,  nevertheless, 
prove   that  property   was   the  main   object   of   so- 


60  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

ciety.  .  .  ."  And  so  to-day,  when  classes  are  clearly 
marked,  as  when  a  strike  is  on,  government  troops 
do  not  hesitate  to  sacrifice  the  lives  of  workingmen 
in  order  to  prevent  the  destruction  of  capitalists' 
property.  Morris'  statement  still  applies  to  our 
government. 

Sometimes  the  working  class  obtains  power  enough 
to  pass  an  eight  hour  law.  When  this  happens  our 
courts  declare  the  law  unconstitutional  on  the 
grounds  that  it  interferes  with  the  right  to  work  and 
thus  infringes  on  the  workers'  liberty.  The  workers 
are  only  too  willing  to  surrender  this  "  liberty  "  and 
many  bitter  strikes  have  taken  place  where  this  desire 
of  the  workers  was  the  bone  of  contention.  The 
capitalists  are  opposed  to  this  law  and  such  court 
decisions  only  prove  the  class  character  of  our  gov- 
ernment. 

Again  the  hours  during  which  the  government  con- 
ducts its  business  are  those  in  which  the  working  class 
are  at  work.  Consequently  working  people  cannot 
take  an  active  interest  in  their  government  without 
losing  their  jobs.  This,  however,  does  not  cause  a 
serious  disturbance  in  the  running  of  government 
because  the  government  deals  with  property  rela- 
tions and  property-owners  can  find  all  the  time  they 
need  to  safeguard  their  interests  during  regular 
hours.  This  enables  the  propertied  interests  to  exer- 
cise a  control  over  the  government  that  is  little  ap- 
preciated by  the  working  class.  Again,  modem 
governments  are  vitally  interested  in  questions  of 
Free  Trade,  Tariff^,  Ship  Subsidies,  Mines,  etc. 
These  interests  are  purely  for  the  benefit  of  the 
capitalist  class ;  the  workers  do  not  benefit  from  them. 

Modern  government  is  thus  seen  to  be  an  instru- 
ment of  the  capitalist  class.     This  does  not  mean  that 


THE  MODERN  STATE  61 

this  class  resorts  to  bribery  and  other  dirty  work  in 
order  to  make  modern  government  the  class  instru- 
ment it  is.  To  be  sure  these  methods  are  employed 
by  special  interests  among  the  capitalist  class,  but 
class  government  wovld  he  just  as  firmly  entrenched 
if  tliese  evils  were  entirely  removed.  Modem  gov- 
ernment is  an  unconscious  but  real  result  of  modern 
conditions.  And  our  officials  are  generally  honest 
when  they  vote  for  and  enforce  these  capitalist  meas- 
ures. The  effect  of  the  times  is  to  make  such 
legislation  unconstitutional  which  favors  any  class 
other  than  the  capitalist  class. 

Modern  government,  as  an  instrument  of  the 
capitalist  class,  thus  becomes  arrayed  against  the 
working  class.  As  long  as  the  government  protects 
the  profit  system,  so  long  will  the  working  class  find 
its  demands  for  relief  from  present  industrial  condi 
tions  unsatisfied.  The  working  class  must  use  its 
political  power  to  change  the  character  of  the  gov 
ernment  before  it  can  obtain  permanent  relief, 

The  class  character  of  modem  government  is,  then, 
its  essential  characteristic,  and  it  is  in  this  sense  that 
earlier  Socialist  writers  say  that  the  state  will  not 
exist  under  Socialism.  However,  the  meaning  of  the 
word  state  has  undergone  a  profound  change  since 
the  beginnings  of  Scientific  Socialism.  The  modern 
word  state  is  synonymous  with  society.  Conse- 
quently when  Socialist  writers  are  quoted  as  being 
opposed  to  the  state  that  does  not  mean  that  they 
are  opposed  to  organized  government.  It  does  mean 
that  they  are  opposed  to  class  government  and  in 
this  they  utter  the  sentiment  of  all  Socialists.  With 
the  new  meaning  of  the  word  state,  Socialists  realize 
that  they  are  as  much  a  part  of  the  state  as  any, 
and  as  Modem  Government  becomes  more  and  more 


ii- 
itsl 
w-  j 


6«  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

reconciled  to  this  idea  of  the  state,  the  more  must 
Socialists  take  an  interest  in  it.  Modern  Govern- 
ment is  itself  in  process  of  evolution  and  Socialists 
are  doing  all  in  their  power  to  hasten  and  modify 
that  change. 

The  change  in  the  character  of  the  state  is  a  result 
of  the  activity  of  the  organized  portions  of  the  work- 
ing class,  namely,  the  labor  organizations  and  the 
Socialist  parties.  We  find  that  the  modem  state  is 
beginning  to  legislate  for  shorter  working  hours  for 
women  and  children  and  at  times  even  for  men.  The 
work  of  boards  of  health  is  mainly  for  the  poorer 
class ;  parkways  are  set  aside  for  the  benefit  of  all. 
These  and  similar  activities  show  that  the  modern 
state  has  already  begun  to  lose  some  of  its  class 
character.  This  tendency  can  be  increased  by  the 
working  class  taking  advantage  of  their  power. 
This  power,  however,  can  only  be  obtained  through 
organization. 

Modem  government  is,  then,  class  government,  but 
it  is  so  onl2/  by  consent  of  the  bulk  of  the  citizenship, 
the  vast  majority  of  whom  are  members  of  the  work- 
ing class.  No  longer  can  they  say  that  they  are 
helpless.  The  ruling  class,  the  capitalist  class,  rule 
only  by  the  consent  of  the  working  class.  We  must 
not  blame  the  former  for  legislating  for  themselves; 
self  preservation  is  the  first  law  of  nature.  The 
working  class  must  be  educated  as  to  the  true  charac- 
ter of  modem  government.  They  must  be  taught 
that  class  rule  does  not  result  from  the  desires  of 
individuals.  They  must  learn  that  individuals  them- 
selves are  largely  the  product  of  their  economic  en- 
vironment, and  that  in  order  to  change  that  environ- 
ment the  prevailing  economic  system  must  be  changed. 
Since  individual   character  is   an  effect  and  not  a 


THE  MODERN  STATE  SB 

cause  of  economic  conditions,  it  is  evident  that 
actions  against  individuals  or  groups  can  cause  no 
fundamental  change.  This  is  one  of  the  important 
messages  of  scientific  Socialism  to  all,  but  particu- 
larly to  the  working  class. 


CHAPTER  IV 

Socialism  as  a  Criticism  of  Modem  Society  —  Widespread 
Evil   Conditions  —  Capitalist   and   Socialist  Efl&ciency 

A  TEST  of  the  worth  of  any  social  system  is  the 
general  level  of  human  happiness  which  it 
brings.  A  nation  may  be  the  richest  on 
earth,  yet  those  riches  may  be  confined  to  a  small 
number  of  property-owners  who  make  their  profits  off 
the  sweat  and  toil  of  an  enormous  majority  of 
hard-working,  underpaid,  underfed,  undereducated, 
wretched  toilers.  A  nation  may  make  little  noise 
about  its  vast  figures  of  wealth,  yet  the  average  of 
social  health  and  well-being  may  be  much  higher  than 
in  the  "  richest  "  countries. 

If  money  is  made  in  the  shape  of  profits,  and  those 
profits  are  taken  by  a  class  which  itself  performs  no 
labor  of  social  value,  then  somebody  —  some  other 
class,  must  be  doing  more  than  its  share  of  work,  and 
getting  less  than  its  share  of  the  wealth  produced. 
This  is  self-evident.  Nor  is  it  important  how  much 
less  one  class  is  getting  or  how  much  more  the  other 
receives;  the  point  is  that  less  and  more  are  being 
received.  And,  although  it  may  not  yet  be  evident 
to  the  reader,  from  this  arrangement  flow  the  greater 
part  of  the  evils,  if  not  all,  which  Socialists  find  to 
criticize  in  modern  society.  Nor  are  the  Socialists 
alone  in  finding  fault. 

No  one  will  deny,  unless  he  wish  to  fly  in  the  face 
of  the  most  common  experiences,  that  there  is  a 
frightfully  wide  gap  between  the  rich  and  the  poor 

to-day ;  not  only  in  America  does  this  hold  true,  but 

54 


THE  PROSPERITY  HOAX  65 

all  over  the  world.  No  one  will  care  to  deny  that  the 
rich,  as  a  class,  are  underworked,  and  the  poor,  as  a 
class,  overworked.  Unless,  indeed,  the  poor  can  find 
no  work  at  all,  which  is  even  as  bad.  Members  of  all 
political  parties,  of  widely-differing  religious  and 
social  views,  agree  on  the  facts,  but  they  differ  with 
the  Socialist  on  the  cause.  Before  applying  the 
remedy  to  these  evils,  then,  let  us  survey  the  most 
glaring  defects  in  our  daily  life  as  they  appear  to  any 
person  with  eyes  half  open  —  as  they  appear  to  all, 
regardless  of  religion,  social  or  political  bias. 

In  recent  years  the  phrase  "  high  cost  of  living  " 
■has  become  part  of  our  daily  vocabulary.  It  is 
becoming  increasingly  evident  that  it  costs  more  to 
live  to-day  than  ever  before,  both  in  labor  and  in 
money.  We  noticed  at  the  very  outset  that  in 
seventeen  years  the  cost  of  living  has  increased  nearly 
80%,  while  wages  and  salaries  had  risen  no  more 
than  a  quarter  of  that  percentage.  If  this  state  of 
affairs  continues,  it  is  only  a  question  of  time  before 
the  working-class,  greatly  increased  by  members  of 
the  middle-class  whose  means  will  have  been  thinned, 
will  evolve  into  a  vast  concourse  of  economic  slaves. 
And  looking  beneath  the  surface,  they  are  little  better 
than  that  at  present. 

Investigation  made  by  non-Socialist  writers,  aided 
by  government  figures,  has  resulted  in  the  claim  that 
in  the  Southern  industrial  centers  a  family  of  five 
needs  at  least  $700.00  per  year  to  live  in  bare 
decency,  while  for  the  same  purpose  in  the  Northern 
centers  $750.00  would  be  required.  In  the  larger 
cities,  where  the  rents  are  higher,  the  minimum  is 
estimated  at  $850.00.  To  most  who  read  this  book 
the  figures  will  appear  to  be  surprisingly  low.  And 
so  they  are,  for  in  the  calculations  nothing  has  been 


50  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

counted  that  could  be  looked  upon  as  a  luxury. 
What  must  be  the  astonishment  of  all  thinking  folk 
when  they  learn,  from  the  government's  census  of 
1910,  that  the  average  family  income  in  these  United 
States  is  a  trifle  over  $500.00  per  year! 

In  the  face  of  this  one  fact,  what  becomes  of  all 
"prosperity"  boasts?  What  becomes  of  large  na- 
tional per-capitas?  And  when  we  remember  that 
$500.00  is  merely  cm  average^  how  many  families 
must  be  dwelling  in  abject  poverty  and  ignorance, 
far  below  that  standard?  And  what,  indeed,  must 
be  the  wide  chasm  between  this  class  and  the  small, 
but  powerful,  rich  class  that  would  look  upon  the 
whole  yearly  income  of  the  worker  as  merely  a  part 
of  the  expense  for  a  monkey  dinner? 

In  order  to  illustrate  the  yawning  gulf  between  the 
rich  and  the  poor  class,  let  us  take  another  illustra- 
tion from  the  government's  statistics.  This  time  we 
will  go  from  families  to  individuals.  According  to 
an  analysis  of  the  income  tax  figures  for  1913,  96% 
of  all  the  persons  who  have  any  income  at  all  whether 
from  wages,  salaries  or  investments,  average  only 
$601.00  yearly.  The  other  four  per  cent.,  very  evi- 
dently, do  not  belong  to  the  working-class. 

Is  it  not  merely  common  sense  to  predict  that,  with 
the  cost  of  living  rising  as  it  does  (despite  tariff- 
measures,  trust  laws  and  all  other  reform  efforts), 
this  gap  between  the  rich  and  poor,  frightful  as  it  is, 
will  become  wider  still?  On  the  one  hand  an  ever- 
richer  few  will  riot  in  luxury,  while  on  the  other,  an 
ever  increasing  many  will  sink  into  degradation. 

It  is  significant  here  to  notice  that  politicians  of 
the  old  parties,  although  they  deny  "  hard  times  " 
and  cry  "  prosperity  "  while  i/n  office,  change  their, 
song  when  up  for  reelection,  and  promise  to  pass 


THE  PROSPERITY  HOAX  67 

legislation  remedying  the  very  social  troubles  whose 
existence  they  before  denied!  And  as  often  as  such 
legislation  has  been  enacted,  the  trouble  grows  con- 
stantly greater.  There  is  evidently  something 
deeper  down  which  the  politicians  have  not  reached. 

Together  with  the  high  cost  of  living  goes  the  low 
pay  which  results  in  such  startling  figures  as  we  have 
just  witnessed  from  the  government  reports.  It  does 
not  matter  that,  because  of  certain  conditions,  a  few 
workers  are  relatively  well-paid;  it  is  the  total  result 
that  counts,  and  what  that  is  we  have  seen. 

When  the  workingman  is  underpaid,  the  deficit,  if 
possible,  must  be  made  up  by  finding  work  for  the 
other  members  of  the  family,  female  as  well  as  male. 
Despite  the  cry  that  "  woman's  place  is  the  home," 
modern  industry  has  taken  her  out  of  the  home  and 
into  the  factory,  department  store,  and  the  mill. 
Here  she  is  paid  less  than  men's  wages,  and  becomes 
a  competitor  against  the  man,  thus  bringing  down  his 
wages  as  well  as  keeping  her  own  at  a  low  level.  Not 
alone  the  woman  has  been  forced  into  labor  by 
modem  conditions,  but  even  the  child  has  been  taken 
from  his  home,  snatched  from  the  fields  where  trees 
and  flowers  would  teach  him  their  secrets,  torn  from 
the  school  where  books  would  complete  his  educa- 
tion, and  forced  to  toil  that  the  family  income  might 
be  raised  to  a  level  of  decency. 

And  this  level  of  decency,  in  families  of  five,  is 
$500.00  per  year  on  an  average! 

One  would  imagine,  too,  that  any  country  which 
laid  claim  to  being  a  center  of  culture  and  justice 
would  at  least  have  work  for  all  who  wished  it  and 
were  able  to  earn  a  living.  But  there  is  not  a  coun- 
try on  the  face  of  the  earth  which  provides  work  for 
all  who  wish  it.     In  the  best  of  times  millions  are  idle 


68  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

through  na  fault  of  their  own;  in  times  of  economic 
depression  their  number  is  doubled.  It  makes  no 
diffierence  just  how  many;  the  important  thing  is 
that  able  people  who  want  and  need  work  cannot  find 
it.  The  total  number  of  unemployed  during  the 
year  1900,  for  instance,  counting  men  and  women 
out  of  work  from  one  month  to  the  entire  year  was, 
(according  to  the  Census  Volume  on  Occupations) 
6,468,964*.  This  is  a  number  equal  to  the  entire  vote 
cast  for  Bryan  in  1908!  During  the  year  1900 
approximately  $1,000,000,000.00  (one  billion  dol- 
lars) was  lost  to  the  workers  in  wages.  The  total 
number  of  children  working  in  the  United  States  in 
1912  was  1,750,000  out  of  an  entire  9,613,252  chil- 
dren in  the  nation,  between  the  ages  of  10  and  15. 
The  total  number  of  women  employed  in  the  nation 
during  1900  was  5,319,397.  But  all  these  figures 
signify  nothing,  if  it  cannot  be  seen  that  underneath 
them  stands  the  ghastly  confession  that  here  is  a 
nation  (reproducing  conditions  that  exist  all  over  the 
world)  where  millions  are  doomed  to  enforced  idle- 
ness, where  women  are  taken  from  the  home  into  the 
vortex  of  modem  business,  and  where  even  the  child 
of  the  family  must  contribute  his  undeveloped  brain 
and  brawn  to  keep  the  family  from  starvation. 

It  is  a  very  small  step  from  low  wages  and  over- 
work (or  no  work  at  all)  to  crime,  prostitution,  in- 
temperance and  general  debasement.  The  man  or 
woman  who  wants  work  and  cannot  procure  it  gradu- 
ally becomes  unsuited  to  work,  and  if  the  difficulty 
in  finding  a  position  continues,  there  is  a  positive 
disinclination  to  work  at  all.  From  being  disem- 
ployed,  by  economic  conditions,  the  worker  becomes 
unemployable  and  finally  unwilling  to  be  employed  at 
all.     In  this  psychological  progress  lies  part  of  the 


MODERN  EVILS  69 

explanation  of  our  '*  hobo  "  types. 

The  connection  between  prostitution  and  low  wages 
is  direct.  Girls  must  make  a  living.  Men  must 
marry.  If  department  stores  pay  too  little,  there  is 
the  ever-ready  cadet  and  madame  to  show  "  the 
easiest  way  "  to  the  discouraged  girl  whose  moral 
fiber  has  been  weakened  in  the  ordeal  of  making  both 
ends  meet.  With  low  wages  the  general  rule  for  men, 
too,  young  fellows  are  afraid  to  venture  marriage  in 
the  face  of  an  increasing  cost  of  living,  and  they  turn 
to  the  brothel  instead.  Present  conditions,  then, 
favor  prostitution  from  both  the  man's  and  the 
woman's  angle.  To  blink  at  these  facts,  or  to  at- 
tempt, like  many  once  did,  to  explain  them  away  by 
well-sounding  words,  is  out  of  fashion.  The  most 
reactionary  elements  in  society  to-day  are  being 
forced  to  admit  that  the  major  part  of  the  evils  of 
prostitution  are  rooted  in  bad  economic  conditions. 
It  is  true  that  "  vice  weakens  the  strong  and  kills  the 
weak,"  and  that  the  weaker  characters  are  first  to 
succumb  to  the  pressure  of  hard  times,  but  it  is  only 
a  matter  of  time  and  pressure  when  even  the  strong, 
having  been  weakened,  follow  the  general  path. 

As  to  intemj>erance,  we  wish  no  greater  authority 
than  the  world-renowned  Frances  Willard,  who,  after 
a  life  devoted  to  fighting  the  liquor  evil,  declared,  at 
the  1897  convention  of  the  Women's  Christian  Tem- 
perance Union,  held  in  Buffalo,  her  adherence  to 
Socialism.  Speaking  in  June,  1895,  before  the 
W.  C.  T.  U.  in  London,  she  said :  "  For  myself, 
twenty-one  years  of  study  and  observation  have  con- 
vinced me  that  poverty  is  a  prime  cause  of  intew- 
perance  and  that  misery  is  the  mother,  and  heredi- 
tary appetite  the  father  of  drink  hallucination." 

When  we  glance  for  a  moment  at  the  extent  of 


60  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

poverty  in  this  country,  we  can  well  understand  why 
the  drink  evil  is  still  so  great  a  curse.  Robert 
Hunter,  after  making  one  of  the  most  minute  investi- 
gations ever  conducted  on  the  subject,  came  to  the 
conclusion  that  "  there  are  no  fewer  than  10,000,000 
(ten  million)  persons  in  actual  poverty  in  the  United 
States,"  reckoning  conservatively!  Various  esti- 
mates by  competent  authorities  have  placed  the  num- 
ber of  public  and  private  dependants  in  the  country 
at  3,000,000,  constituting  in  1893  a  twenty-fifth  of 
the  entire  nation's  people!  It  is  interesting  to  note 
that  the  causes  of  this  poverty  have  also  been  investi- 
gated by  non-Socialists,  and  that  first  in  the  list  of 
causes  stands  unemployment  and  low  wages.  More- 
over, whereas,  in  investigations  made  in  New  York 
city,  intemperance  caused  only  two  per  cent,  of  the 
poverty,  contrast  this  with  Frances  Willard's  state- 
ment that  poverty  was  the  cause,  and  not  the  result, 
of  the  liquor  evil. 

So  much  for  a  very  hasty  and  necessarily  incom- 
plete survey  of  present-day  evils  from  the  worker's 
angle.  Let  us  now  look  at  the  evil  worked  among 
the  upper  classes,  who,  too,  are  debased  in  a  differ- 
ent way,  and  who  see  to  it  that  the  working-class 
foots  the  bill  in  every  possible  instance. 

As  things  are  run  to-day,  business  is  conducted 
for  profits.  The  real  significance  of  profits  we  dis- 
cussed in  the  very  first  paragraphs  of  this  chapter. 
The  general  evils  worked  upon  the  poor  and  the  rich, 
then,  by  the  present  system,  are  due  to  the  fact  that 
the  poor  must  provide  those  profits  and  that  the  rich 
take  them. 

In  order  to  make  profits,  health  and  life  itself  are 
risked,  materials  and  foods  are  adulterated,  politics 
and  courts  are  corrupted,  churches  are  silenced  and 


MODERN  EVILS  61 

as  a  final  horror,  wars  for  markets  take  place. 

Every  year  shows  a  toll  of  death  among  the  work- 
ers that  could  have  been  prevented.  Much  of  this  is 
hidden  under  "  accident "  reports,  where  the  acci- 
dents might  have  been  prevented  by  the  installation 
of  safe-guards.  But  that  would  lessen  profits,  and 
so  debased  in  the  mad  race  for  wealth  have  the  owners 
become,  that  such  safe-guards  are  installed  only  at 
the  command  of  the  law,  and  not  even  then  if  subter- 
fuge can  aid  in  avoiding  the  statutes.  Much  of  this 
death,  too,  occurs  from  preventable  sickness  loosely 
labeled  "  occupational  diseases."  These,  again, 
would  be  more  efficiently  prevented  were  human  life 
more  valuable  than  gain.     But,  to-day  it  is  not. 

The  adulteration  of  foods  and  other  materials 
would  alone  make  a  good  sized  book.  Although  Dr. 
Harvey  W.  Wiley  served,  while  in  the  government 
employ,  to  call  public  attention  to  the  extent  of  food 
adulteration  (which  he  has  placed  at  about  five  per 
cent,  of  all  food  sold)  he  did  not  point  out  that  it  was 
a  direct  consequence  of  the  desire  to  increase  profits. 
Dr.  I.  W.  Abbot,  of  the  Massachusetts  State  Board 
of  Health,  placed  the  total  percentage  of  food  adul- 
teration as  high  as  one-tenth  of  all  food  sold,  or,  in 
other  words,  at  a  value  of  $750,000,000.00  yearly! 

The  pure  food  laws  which  were  passed  as  a  result 
of  Wiley's  exposures  (he  could  have  gone  a  good  deal 
further  than  he  did)  had  as  chief  effect  not  the  aboli- 
tion of  adulteration,  which  still  flourishes  as  much 
as  ever,  but  merely  the  legalization  (in  a  good  many 
instances)  of  adulteration,  and  the  getting  around 
the  laws  by  clever  manufacturers. 

The  corruption  of  court  and  legislative  bodies  is 
too  common  a  newspaper  item  to  need  large  space 
here.     Every  election  brings  its  new  crop  of  political 


6ft  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

and  judicial  exposures.  It  does  not  matter  who  is 
exposed,  any  more  than  it  mattered  jiist  how  many 
people  were  prevented  from  working.  It  is  enough 
that  the  corruption  exists  and  is  taken  for  granted  as 
part  of  our  political  life.  In  every  case  this  cor- 
ruption has  centered  about  "  graft  "  and  offices  which 
meant  large  fees  and  business  opportunities  —  in 
other  words,  financial  gain.  If  large  business  inter- 
ests are  in  politics  (and  it  did  not  take  the  Social- 
ists to  spread  that  information,  as  the  contending 
capitalists  saved  them  the  trouble)  they  are  there  to 
influence  legislation  and  to  spread  their  power  over 
the  courts  which  interpret  legislation.  Lincoln 
StefFens,  non-Socialist,  in  his  "  Struggle  for  Self- 
Government,"  writes  as  follows: 

Our  political  corruption  is  a  system,  a  regularly  established 
custom  of  the  country,  by  which  our  political  leaders  are  hired 
by  bribery,  by  the  license  to  loot  and  by  quiet  moral  support 
to  conduct  the  government  of  this  city,  state  and  nation,  not 
for  the  common  good,  but  for  the  special  interests  of  private 
business.  Not  the  politicians,  then,  not  the  bribetaker,  but  the 
bribegiver,  the  man  we  are  so  proud  of,  our  successful  business 
man  —  he  is  the  source  and  sustenance  of  our  bad  government. 
The  captain  of  industry  is  the  man  to  catch. 

And  it  should  be  remembered  that  the  captain  of 
industry  himself  is  but  the  product  of  something 
greater  and  more  powerful  than  he  and  his  kind  — 
the  social  and  industrial  system  under  which  we  live. 

Not  least  in  the  indictments  brought  against  the 
present-day  system  is  its  enormous  waste,  due  to 
competition,  old  methods,  superfluous  advertising, 
unemploymen,t,  unguarded  life,  idle  factories  and 
various  other  causes.  This  phase  of  modem  society 
is  only  slowly  coming  to  public  notice.  A.  M.  Si- 
mons, in  "Wasting  Human  Life,"  has  shown  that 
over  105  billion  dollars'  worth  of  value  is  practically 


WAR  AND  THE  SYSTEM  63 

thrown  away  yearly.  Nor  has  he  given  the  total  fig- 
ure by  far. 

But  the  crowning  waste  of  all,  and  the  crowning 
irony  of  the  workers'  existence  is  war.  And  war  is 
an  inevitable  outcome  of  the  system  under  which  we 
live. 

War  may  rightly  be  called  the  system  under  which 
we  live,  forged  to  a  white  heat.  It  is  the  logical  re- 
sult of  the  chase  after  profits.  Just  as  man  must 
compete  against  man  in  modern  business,  so  must 
nation  compete  against  nation.  Just  as  the  weaker 
man  is  forced  into  personal  bankruptcy,  so  is  the 
weaker  country  forced  into  national  bankruptcy. 
Accumulations  of  wealth  demand  ever  increasing 
fields  for  reinvestment ;  the  capitalists  of  one  country 
having  covered  their  own  territory  must  expand; 
this  they  accomplish  by  fair  means  or  foul,  as  the 
histories  of  past  wars  have  amply  proved.  We  do 
not  need  to  argue  the  commercial  basis  of  war;  read 
any  reliable  historian.  Recall  the  relation  between 
our  own  Sugar  trust  and  the  Spanish  War;  ponder 
over  the  greatest  war  yet,  between  Germany  and 
England,  practically.  Though  much  confused  and 
disguised  by  minor  and  dependent  issues,  the  war  was 
started  in  cold  blood,  prepared  for  years  ahead,  for 
commercial  suprcTnacy, 

Already,  from  sources  that  cannot  be  accused  of 
sympathy  for  the  Socialist  cause,  come  cries  against 
the  conscienceless  shedding  of  blood  and  killing  of 
mankind's  best  energies  in  ghastly  shambles  of  ma- 
niac battles.  The  call  to  "  patriotism  "  finds  less 
response  than  in  former  days.  People  are  beginning 
to  ask  why  they  shall  fight  folk  of  other  nations  with 
whom  they  have  no  clear-cut  quarrel.  Soon  they 
will  begin  to  ask  why  shall  they  fight  each  other  in 


64  ABC  OF  SOCIALISM 

that  less  bloody,  but  no  less  fierce  warfare  called 
"  making  a  living."  They  will  recognize  that  the 
world  produces  enough  for  all  and  will  want  to  know 
why  the  all  are  not  receiving  that  plenty,  and  why  it 
is  precisely  those  who  work  hardest  who  acquire  least, 
while  those  that  do  practically  nothing  seem  to  gain 
all?  Is  this  not  so?  Have  you  not  heard  it  from 
the  minister's  sermon,  read  it  in  the  newspapers, 
talked  it  over  in  the  shop?  Yes,  we  know  what  is 
wrong,  but  how  remedy  it? 

One  advantage  of  the  Socialist  criticism  of  modern 
society,  omitting  for  the  present  the  remedy  (which 
we  shall  discuss  later)  is  this:  whereas  all  the  other 
critics  agree  that  things  are  bad  and  point  out  the 
particular  evils  with  about  the  same  clearness  as  the 
Socialists,  the  latter  alone  relate  all  these  evils  to  a 
central  origin.  They  alone  see  in  modern  social 
problems  the  by-products  of  an  underlying  basic 
principle,  so  to  speak.  When  the  capitalist  exclaims 
that  this  is  a  highly  efficient  form  of  society,  he  is 
right,  from  his  class  standpoint :  for  to  the  capitalist 
'^  efficiency "  means  anything  that  brings  in  more 
profits.  To  the  Socialist  "  efficiency  "  means,  in  the 
long  run,  anything  that  brings  humanity  more  hap- 
piness. The  modem  efficiency  engineer  of  whom  we 
hear  so  much  in  these  commercial  times,  is  the  hired 
brains  of  the  capitalist  class,  whose  duty  it  is  to  de- 
vise ways  and  means  for  extracting  more  profits 
from  the  working-class.  The  Socialist  view  starts 
exactly  from  the  opposite  end :  it  proclaims  the  need 
of  working-class  efficiency  to  extract  from  life  all  of 
the  good  things  which  are  rightly  the  makers'  (i,e., 
the  workers')  due. 

The  Golden  Rule  cannot  be  practiced  in  modem 
society;   the   very   foundation  upon  which  modem 


WAR  AND  THE  SYSTEM  65 

business  is  built  makes  it  impossible.  The  complaint 
"  If  men  would  only  practice  the  golden  rule  the 
world  would  be  better  "  should  logically  be  changed 
to  "  the  golden  rule  could  be  practiced  if  the  world 
were  better."  In  other  words,  this  is  a  concrete  illus- 
tration of  the  principle  of  economic  determinism 
spoken  of  in  the  previous  chapter.  Men  are  as 
good,  in  this  worlds  as  the  world  lets  them  he,  not  as 
good  as  they  ought  to  be. 

We  shall  now  consider  in  a  rapid  survey  some  of 
the  ideas  and  ideals  of  the  past  ages  in  regard  to 
their  own  problems ;  we  shall  see  how  people  proposed 
to  cure  their  epoch's  evils,  and  why  they  failed.  We 
shall  then  see  whether  similar  errors  are  being  made 
in  our  own  day,  and  we  will  be  prepared  to  appreci- 
ate more  fully  the  significance  of  the  Socialist  reme- 
dies and  the  political  party  which  embodies  them. 


CHAPTER  V 

Ideal  Aspects  of  Socialism — "Utopias" — Socialism  Distin- 
guished from  Communism  —  Socialism,  Utopian  and  Scien- 
tific—  Origin  of  Some  Mistaken  Objections  to  Socialism 

IT  has  been  said  that  people  cannot  long  discuss 
what  is  without  coming  to  what,  in  their  opinion, 
ought  to  be.  Aspiration  for  better  things  is  a 
characteristic  of  human  effort.  In  all  epochs  man 
has  sought  relief  from  the  stern  realities  of  life  by 
turning  to  his  imagination  and  picturing  realms 
where  instead  of  toil  there  was  rest,  instead  of  worry 
and  inequality,  peace  and  fraternity.  This  ideal 
longing  has  played  its  part  in  Socialism,  and  much 
of  its  power  is  evident  to-day;  but  it  must  be  dis- 
tinguished from  the  official  Socialism  of  the  party 
in  whose  interest  this  book  is  written.  It  must  fur- 
thermore be  held  in  mind  throughout  that  whereas 
early  ideals  were  individiial  in  origin,  and  often  liter- 
ary rather  than  economic,  modem  ideals  are  gen- 
erally social  both  in  origin  and  application.  This 
is  an  interesting  example  of  economic  determinism 
working  upon  thought;  in  the  early  days,  when  ef- 
fort was  still  unorganized  and  sporadic,  the  ideals 
which  arose  were  similarly  individual  and  disunited. 
In  modem  times,  whether  socialistic  or  not,  ideals 
tend  to  achieve  social  character. 

These  distinctions,  and  a  few  others  which  shall 
presently  appear,  must  be  constantly  borne  in  mind, 
lest  the  reader  fall  into  the  same  errors  in  his  con- 
ceptions of  Socialism  as  the  world  did  in  its  evolu- 

66 


EARLY  "  UTOPIAS  "  67 

tion  from  the  crude  beginnings  to  the  present  highly 
organized  party.  Many  writers  whose  thought 
penetrates  only  the  surface  have  written  that  "  So- 
cialism began  with  Plato,"  or  that  "  Socialism  was 
tried  in  ancient  Peru  and  proved  a  failure."  Such 
statements,  and  similar  nonsense,  show  that  their 
originators  have  not  grasped  even  the  elementary 
principles  of  Socialism;  that  they  have  not  learned 
the  difference  between  Communism  and  Socialism; 
that  they  have  not  learned  to  distinguish  between 
Utopian  and  scientific  Socialism,  and  finally,  that 
they  are  in  complete  ignorance  of  the  real  meaning 
of  economic  determinism.  The  present  chapter  has 
for  its  purpose  the  explanation  of  several  of  the  Uto- 
pian authors,  writers  and  thinkers  (who  have  con- 
fused Socialists  and  non-Socialists  alike)  and  will 
also  seek  to  explain  the  various  distinctions  given 
above  and  the  errors  to  which  a  misunderstanding 
of  them  leads. 

Firstly,  as  to  the  word  "  Utopia."  It  comes  from 
two  Greek  words  .signifying  "  nowhere,"  or  "  no 
place."  Early  writers  especially,  and  quite  a  few 
modem  ones,  when  desiring  to  give  a  far  away  ap- 
pearance to  their  work  (often  wishing  to  disguise 
its  contemporary  application  lest  some  ruler  be  of- 
fended) chose  an  imaginary  location,  peopled  it  with 
imaginary  beings  and  surrounded  it  with  imaginary 
conditions.  They  then  unfolded,  each  after  his  par- 
ticular notions,  some  fortunate  land  where  humanity 
had  at  last  solved  the  problem  of  happiness  for  all. 
One  of  the  earliest  examples  of  such  writings,  which 
has  absolutely  nothing  to  do  with  Socialism,  but 
which  for  other  reasons  serves  very  well  to  start  with, 
is  Plato's  "  Republic."  This  much-abused  book, 
which  has  affected  later  writers  of  Utopias,  has  been 


68  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

responsible  for  much  unjustified  criticism  of  Social- 
ism on  moral  grounds. 

Plato  lived  from  429  to  347  b.  c.  In  his  "  Re- 
public "  and  "  Laws "  he  expounded  an  imaginary 
system  in  an  imaginary  country,  and  with  the  char- 
acteristic economic  ideas  of  his  times,  he  had  no  iLse 
for  the  working  class  at  all,  except  as  they  were  to 
serve  as  slaves  for  his  land  of  aristocrats.  His 
scheme  called,  among  other  things,  for  the  common 
ownership  of  property  and  of  wives  (referring,  of 
course,  only  to  the  ruling  class),  and  it  is  this  in 
particular  which  has  been  brought  against  modem 
Socialists  by  people  as  much  alive  to  modem  condi- 
tions as  Plato  could  have  been  several  centuries  be- 
fore Christ.  Plato's  writings  cannot  have  the  slight- 
est possible  relation  to  the  Socialism  that  is  spread 
to-day,  because  modern  Socialism  itself  could  not 
have  arisen  until  Capitalism  was  firmly  established. 
Modem  Socialism  is  the  result  of  Capitalism's  sway; 
to  connect  Socialism  with  Plato,  then,  or  with  an- 
cient China  and  Peru,  is  equivalent  to  saying  that  a 
result  can  exist  before  its  cause. 

Plato's  scheme,  if  ^  it  is  to  be  connected  with  any 
notions  current  in  these  days,  is  more  akin  to  Com- 
munism than  to  Socialism.  Communism  is  to  be  dis- 
tinguished sharply  from  Socialism.  The  first  has 
always  existed  in  one  form  or  another,  and  lends  it- 
self easily  to  primitive  society's  needs.  The  early 
Christian  church,  too,  was  largely  communistic  in 
character,  all  things  being  owned  in  common.  In  the 
eighteenth  century  a  wave  of  Communism  swept  over 
France;  the  general  spirit  of  the  writings  of  this 
epoch  being  that  man,  naturally  good,  was  debased 
by  unnatural  conditions;  that  property,  unless 
owned  by  all  in  common,  was  a  harmful  influence, 


EARLY  "  UTOPIAS  "  69 

leading  to  avarice,  greed  and  inequality.  So  that 
even  from  a  fragmentary  explanation  such  as  this 
we  can  see  how  ridiculous  is  a  connection  between  So- 
cialism and  Plato. 

Socialism,  as  we  shall  see  in  the  next  chapter,  far 
from  asking  the  ownership  of  all  property  in  com- 
mon, demands  the  social  ownership  amd  control  of 
all  socially  necessary  actvvities;  communism,  for  in- 
stance, would  ask  the  common  ownership  of  your 
tooth-brush,  your  clothes,  while  Socialism  asks  the 
social  ownership  of  telephones,  telegraphs,  mines, 
railroads  and  all  other  industries.  Failure  to  note 
this  elementary  distinction  has  led  to  much  silly  writ- 
ing against  Socialism.  Thanks  to  diligent  propa- 
ganda, much  of  it  is  now  a  joke  of  the  past.  _ 

Jumping  across  the  ages  we  come  to  the  book 
whose  title  gave  the  general  term  "  Utopia  "  to  our 
language.  Sir  Thomas  More  wrote  his  famous 
"  Utopia  "  about  1511,  and  it  was  printed  some  two 
years  later.  According  to  his  fabled  realm,  all  were 
expected  to  work  six  hours  a  day,  except  those  un- 
able; all  things  were  owned  in  common,  and  every 
ten  years  the  people  chose  their  houses.  Dining  was 
communal,  taking  place  in  large  halls.  Personal 
adornment  was  considered  childish.  There  were  two 
religious  orders  in  the  land,  but  religious  intolerance 
is  unknown.  One  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Utopians 
points  to  the  author's  deep  insight,  considering  the 
times  when  the  book  was  written.  The  doctrine  of 
the  Utopians  was,  that  religious  belief  is  largely  a 
matter  of  environment  and  birth.  The  criminals  of 
the  realm  were  enslaved  and  made  to  perform  useful 
labor. 

It  has  been  recognized  that  this  book  shows  More 
as  a  democrat  at  heart  —  as  a  man  high  in  his  coun- 


70  ABC  OF  SOCIALISM 

try's  life  who  had  perceived  many  of  the  evils  of 
monarchy,  and  the  sources  of  misgovernment.  But 
there  is  nothing  Socialistic  in  the  book,  nor  could 
there  be,  since  Capitalism  was  yet  centuries  away. 
This  was  an  individiuil  reaction  to  certain  evils  in 
monarchial  England.  At  the  same  time,  even  as 
Plato  in  different  degree,  it  contained  the  germs  of 
social  feeling  which  were  later  to  develop  much  more 
strongly.  In  essence,  then.  More,  even  as  Plato,  is 
communistic. 

One  more  example  of  the  communistic  Utopia  will 
serve  to  impress  upon  our  minds  the  general  charac- 
ter of  this  type.  Campanella's  "  Civitas  Solis " 
(City  of  the  Sun)  is  influenced  largely  by  Plato. 
The  writer,  who  lived  from  1568  to  1639,  was  still  a 
vast  distance,  in  time,  away  from  Capitalism.  His 
work,  therefore,  is  in  essence  little  different  from 
Plato  or  More. 

"  The  City  of  the  Sun  "  is  in  the  form  of  a  dia- 
logue between  a  Knight  Templar  and  a  sea-captain. 
The  latter  relates  to  his  hearer  the  tale  of  a  won- 
derful city  he  had  visited,  and  then  describes  in  de- 
tail the  educational  and  legal  system  of  the  place. 
As  in  More,  all  work  who  are  able;  this  is  a  feature 
of  most  communistic  lore.  Wives  and  property  are 
owned  in  common,  as  in  Plato.  There  is,  however, 
no  slavery,  and  people  work  but  four  hours  per  day. 
This  is  two  less  than  in  More's  "  Utopia."  In 
this  connection  it  is  interesting  to  note  that  Benja- 
min Franklin,  years  after  this  book  saw  the  light, 
declared  that  if  all  the  people  on  earth  did  their 
proper  share  of  the  world's  work,  only  four  hours  per 
day  would  be  necessary  to  devote  to  labor.  Were 
Franklin  alive  in  this  age,  with  all  its  vast  array  of 
inventions  to  which  he  himself  contributed,  he  would 


MODERN  "UTOPIAS"  71 

be  even  more  optimistic. 

^^he  Utopias  which  we  have  thus  far  considered 
were  written  by  men  not  in  touch  with  the  large  world 
of  toilers.  Plato  was  a  philosopher  who  disdained 
the  working  class.  More  was  a  statesman  of  ideal 
character,  but  far  removed  from  the  sinews  of  Eng- 
land. Campanella  wrote  his  book  while  imprisoned 
in  a  Neapolitan  dungeon  for  almost  twenty-seven 
years.  All  three  were  ages  away  from  the  develop- 
ment of  modem  Capitalism.  Any  relation  they  may 
have  to  modern  Socialism  is  purely  historical-liter- 
ary. They  aspired  for  better  things,  in  a  way,  but 
not  so  much  as  the  result  of  actual  oppression  as 
from  intellectual  longing.  They  are  among  the  fore- 
runners of  Utopia  writers  who  may  be  called  Social- 
istic rather  than  Communistic;  they  invented  the 
style,  the  general  mold  into  which  later  men  poured 
their  own  metals. 

Perhaps  the  best  example  of  modern  Utopias  is 
the  famous  "Looking  Backward"  (1888),  by  Ed- 
ward Bellamy.  Here  the  fabled  happy  land  becomes 
strongly  tinged  by  actual  social  ideals  of  the  author 
—  ideals  conceived  as  the  result  of  actual  experience 
in  the  world's  realities  —  written  down  in  the  very 
hurly-burly  of  a  world  fast  being  destroyed  by  the 
sinister  forces  of  Capitalism  and  its  pernicious  by- 
products. With  the  actual  contents  of  the  book 
(which  may  easily  be  procured)  we  are  not  con- 
cerned. The  point  to  be  brought  out  is,  that  all 
these  Utopias,  whether  the  early  communistic  stories 
or  the  later  socialistic  ones,  are  individual  expres- 
sions. They  are  not  official  documents  upon  which 
to  base  arguments  for  or  against  Socialism.  Many 
of  them,  it  is  true,  together  with  serious  works  as 
well,  are  sold  by  the  Literature  Department  of  the 


72  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

Party.  This  is  a  matter  of  general  education,  how- 
ever, not  Socialist  propaganda. 

Just  as  there  were  writers  of  Utopias,  there  were, 
too,  people  who  tried  to  initiate  social  reform  with 
similar  ideas.  They  did  not  recognize  that  it  is 
easy  to  build  a  happy  land  on  paper,  but  extremely 
difficult  to  realize  that  land  in  actuality,  especially 
if  such  schemes  mere  not  in  accordance  with  the  eco- 
nomic environment.  The  history  of  the  attempts  to 
establish  different  communities  is  interesting  and  in- 
structive; but  they  are  easily  procured  and  this  is 
not  their  place.  However,  we  note  that  practically 
in  no  case  did  the  establishment  of  any  such  commun- 
ity succeed.  This  is  often  brought  against  Social- 
ism, demonstrating  again  that  the  objectors  have  not 
seized  the  real  significance  of  modern  Socialism. 

Why  did  these  ideals  fail  when  put  into  practice? 
The  noble  Fourier  and  Cabet,  the  self-sacrificing 
Robert  Owen,  were  certainly  men  whose  personality 
was  inspiring,  yet  their  schemes,  as  all  others,  went 
down  in  common  ruin.  Why.^^  Because  they  were 
undertaken  in  defiance  of  social  facts,  in  ignorance 
of  social  principles  and  of  scientific  Socialism.  Be- 
cause they  were  after  all  centered  about  an  individual 
rather  than  about  a  social  prvnciple.  Indeed,  had 
the  lessons  of  scientific  Socialism  been  then  under- 
stood, such  communities  would  never  have  been  un- 
dertaken. 

Frederick  Engels,  in  his  remarkable  classic,  "  The 
Development  of  Socialism  from  Utopia  to  Science," 
takes  up  this  matter  in  full.  So  long  as  people  did 
not  understand  the  laws  of  social  evolution,  which 
have  been  discussed  in  chapter  two,  they  were  inade- 
quate to  cope  with  social  problems  efficiently.  Their 
view-point  was  individual  rather  than  social.     The 


MODERN  "  UTOPIAS  "  73 

early  social  agitators  and  thinkers  proceeded  upon 
the  principle  that  all  the  world  needed  in  order  to 
be  set  upon  the  right  path  was  a  leader,  a  social  Mes- 
siah. They  saw  in  humanity's  troubles  merely  hu- 
man perversity,  or  at  most,  certain  evils  which  could 
be  corrected  by  varying  the  arrangement.  They 
had,  as  many  people  to-day,  not  yet  divined  the  class 
struggle,  or  its  cause. 

Hence  we  have  the  spectacle  of  Robert  Owen's 
brilliant  failure.  Here  was  a  humanitarian  spirit 
that  surrendered  his  possessions  to  his  employees  and 
began  a  tour  of  the  continents  to  preach  human 
brotherhood  by  means  of  a  scheme  well-thought  out, 
but  not  based  upon  the  scientific  foundation  neces- 
sary. He  started  communities,  as  was  then  the  fash- 
ion, only  to  find  them  succumb,  one  after  the  other, 
to  the  inevitable  inroads  of  growing  capitalism.  All 
such  attempts  at  founding  communities  were  broad  in 
spirit;  contrary  to  the  early  Utopian  writings,  they 
were  social  in  inspiration.  But  they  failed  because 
they  were  based  upon  wrong  principles. 

It  is  one  of  the  deductions  from  the  materialist 
conception  of  history  (amply  proved  by  historical 
study),  that  "  leaders  "  of  society  are  the  result Sy  not 
the  causeSy  of  social  progress.  As  a  late  writer  has 
well  expressed  it,  -these  leaders  are  on  the  crest  of  a 
wave  of  social  change,  and  are  mistaken  for  the  wave 
itselE::^  The  progress  of  the  world,  we  have  learned, 
is  determined  by  changing  economic  conditions. 
These  changing  conditions  call  forth  men  of  a  new 
type,  thoughts  and  institutions  of  a  new  order,  and 
it  is  the  greatest  representatives  of  these  new  condi- 
tions that  are  the  leaders  of  their  age.  But  they  are 
none  the  less  the  creations  of  that  age.  The  Kaiser 
did  not  create  German  militarism ;  he  is  its  product ; 


74  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

Washington  did  not  make  our  revolution ;  the  revolu- 
tion called  him  forth. 

This  point  was  missed  in  the  early  days  of  social 
reform.  Humanity  was  waiting  for  the  social  Moses 
to  lead  it  into  the  promised  land.  They  thought 
that  if  he  had  come  a  hundred  years  before,  all  would 
have  been  well;  that  if  he  would  not  arrive  till  a 
hundred  years  around,  all  would  not  be  well  until 
then.  They  had  no  sense  of  the  connection  between 
conditions  and  persons ;  between  the  economic  back- 
ground of  human  institutions  and  "  leaders."  They 
had  no  conception  of  evolution  in  social  progress. 

The  difference  between  "  Utopia "  and  "  scien- 
tific "  Socialism  comes  right  at  this  point.  Socialism 
based  upon  the  deductions  of  the  materialist  concep- 
tion of  history"  (class  struggle  and  surplus  value)  is 
called  scientific  because  it  is  rooted  in  a  well-demon- 
strated and  classified  array  of  social  and  historical 
facts.  Socialism  previous  to  Marx's  epoch-making 
formulation  of  the  materialistic  conception  of  his- 
tory is  called  Utopia  because  it  lacked  this  scientific 
basis. 

A  modern  phase  of  the  "  leader  "  error  is  the  so- 
called  "  good  man  argument."  We  have  seen,  in  the 
very  first  chapter,  that  most  people  in  the  past,  and 
too  many  of  the  present,  have  failed  to  discover  that 
behind  all  social  troubles  stood  a  system,  not  an  in- 
dividual. In  the  same  way  the  modem  political 
"  boss,"  fearing  that  he  may  be  ousted  from  power, 
puts  up  a  candidate  who  enjoys  a  high  reputation 
in  the  community  or  the  nation,  so  that  the  people 
may  think,  "  Here  at  last  is  a  social  leader  who  will 
lead  us  out  of  our  plights."  And  just  as  disap- 
pointment awaited  the  early  believers  in  this  idea,  so 
here,  too,  disappointment  lurks  in  the  shadow  of  the 


WHY  SOME  IDEALS  FAIL  75 

ballot-box.  Reflections  of  such  underlying  notions 
may  also  be  seen  in  personal  attacks  upon  political 
candidates,  rather  than  rigid  scrutiny  of  what  the 
party,  as  a  whole,  stands  for. 

It  thus  becomes  evident  that  people,  in  their  prog- 
ress along  social  lines,  go  through  the  same  errors 
in  their  personal  mental  evolution  as  society's  ideas 
went  through  in  social  evolution.  First  comes  a 
sense  of  wrongs  present  in  society ;  as  a  reaction  to 
this  discovery  of  social  unhappiness,  the  imagination 
pictures  better  realms,  where  trouble  is  unknown. 
Moreover,  attempts  are  made  to  discover  the  individ- 
uals responsible  for  the  wrongs ;  and  if  one  individual 
is  powerful  enough  to  cause  wrongs,  surely  another 
can  arise  to  overcome  him.  Thus  proceeds  the  er- 
roneous reasoning;  thus  comes  the  belief  in  a  person 
being  responsible  and  a  "  leader  "  being  able  to  cure 
it  all.  Not  for  a  long  time,  with  the  progress  of 
social  and  historical  knowledge,  do  we  come  to  the 
point  where  social  thought  ripens  —  where  a  system 
is  seen  to  be  the  cause  of  the  world's  ills  and  where 
the  basis  of  that  system  is  discovered  to  be  not  per- 
sonal, but  economic.  Once  this  is  discovered,  evi- 
dently not  a  leader  is  needed,  but  an  understanding 
of  the  economic  causes,  so  that  the  social  superstruc- 
ture may  be  better  adapted  to  the  economic  basis. 

We  have  to-day  the  startling  inconsistency  of  a 
twentieth-century  economic  basis  of  society,  with  an 
early  nineteenth-century  method  of  administering  it. 
In  other  words,  despite  the  fundamental  changes  that 
have  been  going  on  since  the  days  when  all  commodi- 
ties were  made  by  hand  in  the  home  (and  the  prod- 
ucts thereof  kept  by  the  owner),  we  still  m/n  things 
as  in  the  old  days.  Goods  now  are  made  in  vast 
factories  where  the  former  personal  relation  between 


76  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

maker  and  the  thing  made  has  been  destroyed  beyond 
recognition.  Nobody  knows  (as  in  former  days) 
just  who  made  this  or  that;  this  or  that  has  been 
made  through  the  laborious  cooperation  of  multi- 
tudes of  workingmen  who  no  longer,  as  of  yore,  own 
their  tools.  The  tools  have  become  transformed 
into  machines  too  large  for  a  home.  The  worker 
leaves  his  home  to  go  to  work  in  the  factory.  He 
has  followed  the  tool  from  his  home  to  that  factory. 

In  other  words,  production  of  goods  has  changed 
from  an  individual  to  a  social  activity.  Production, 
in  still  other  words,  has  become  socialized.  But  has 
distribution  —  the  taking  of  the  rewards  of  labor  — 
become  socialized  to  correspond  with  the  economic 
change?  Not  at  all.  This  is  what  is  meant  when  it 
is  sometimes  said,  rather  loosely,  that  "  we  already 
have  Socialism  in  production,  but  we  have  Individual- 
ism in  distribution." 

Our  modern  idealists,  many  of  whom  are  called 
"  reformers,"  have  failed  to  see  this  point.  They 
are  social  idealists,  it  is  true,  and  when  they  do  not 
belong  to  the  coterie  that  is  willfully  deceiving  the 
working  class  they  certainly  do  belong  to  the  larger 
element  who  are  unwillfuUy  deceiving  themselves. 
Like  the  early  Utopian  writers  they  have  discerned 
social  troubles;  like  them,  too,  they  write,  talk  and 
work  against  these  troubles ;  and  still  like  them,  they 
have  not  perceived  the  real  root  of  it  all  with  any 
scientific  precision.  Yet  these  idealists  of  to-day  are 
making  their  contribution  to  progress  even  as  the 
older  ones.  They  are  arousing  the  social  spirit 
which  sooner  or  later  must  come  to  Socialism  for  the 
healing  science  it  contains.  Just  as  the  evolution  of 
Utopian  conceptions  led  to  scientific  Socialism,  so 
will    the    modem    Utopians,    gradually    discovering 


SOCIALISM  AND  IDEALS  77 

their  error,  embrace  Socialism. 

It  may  be  said  that  Utopianism  and  Idealism  are 
not  always  the  same  thing ;  indeed,  a  valuable  distinc- 
tion may  be  made  between  the  two.  Socialism  cer- 
tainly discourages  Utopianism,  but  breeds  a  healthy 
and  efficient  idealism.  Utopianism  might  in  this 
connection  be  called  an  idealism  which  is  unrelated 
to  social  common  sense,  which  is  individual  in  origin 
and  in  application,  which  disregards  economics  and 
history.  The  idealism  which  Socialism  breeds,  how- 
ever, is  not  merely  a  beautiful  hope  that  things  will 
grow  better,  but  the  inspiration  that  here  at  last  is 
a  scientific,  yet  human  reason  why  they  wUl  grow 
better;  why  they  must;  the  ennobling  conviction  that 
although  the  foundations  of  society  are  in  the  hands 
of  unrelenting  economic  law,  we  can  build  upon  that 
foundation  the  greatest  of  institutions,  the  grandest^ 
of  religions,  the  broadest  of  humanities. 

Those  who  have  feared  from  Socialism  a  degrading 
materialism  of  thought  have  been  deceived  by  the 
word  "  materialist,"  as  used  in  the  phrase  "  materi- 
alist conception  of  history."  One  might  as  well  say 
a  man  is  a  degraded  materialist  because  he  insists  on 
three  meals  a  day.  Just  as  personal  idealism  can- 
not exist  to  best  advantage  in  a  starved  body,  so 
social  idealism  cannot  exist  in  a  starved  society.  Just 
as  food  is  the  material  with  which  life  is  nourished, 
and  without  which  the  highest  idealism  would  fail  to 
support  life  for  any  length  of  time,  so  is  the  prob- 
lem of  material  necessities  the  greatest  which  any 
epoch  or  nation  faces.  Once  that  is  settled,  untold 
wonders  of  human  progress  and  happiness  await 
mankind.  Socialism  merely  points  out  that  the  basis 
of  life,  as  well  as  the  basis  of  social  structures,  is 
material  and  economic ;  but  it  demonstrates,  too,  that 


78  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

those  needs  have  been  and  are  to-day  im/necessarily 
restricted  for  millions  of  beings  —  that  once  they 
are  open  to  all  as  a  result  of  the  labor  of  all,  the 
world  will,  for  the  first  time  in  its  history,  he  free 
from  materialism* s  clutches.  Then,  and  then  only 
will  it  reap  the  harvest  of  efficient  idealism's  fertile 
seed. 

If  such  aspiration  be  material,  then  Socialism  must 
plead  guilty.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  men  and  women 
to-day  are  forced  to  think  exclusively  of  where  the 
next  meal  is  coming  from,  and  how  to  provide  for 
life,  let  alone  comforts,  then  the  charge  of  gross  ma- 
terialism must  be  laid  at  the  door  of  Capitalism. 
Common  sense  and  ordinary  observation  have  taught 
the  workingman  and  workingwoman  the  answer  to 
these  "  ifs." 

Perhaps  there  is  no  better  way  of  concluding  this 
chapter  and  impressing  the  pith  of  its  contents  than 
by  considering  the  question:  Could  Christ  have 
been  a  Socialist.?  Many  Socialists  have  called  him 
one;  indeed,  there  is  an  entire  organization  known 
as  the  Christian  Socialists,  although  that  does  not 
necessarily  mean  that  Christ  is  by  them  considered 
as  a  modern  Socialist. 

Christ  could  not,  from  what  and  because  of  what 
we  have  just  learned,  have  been  a  Socialist.  He 
came  too  early.  True,  he  discerned  evils  of  the  day ; 
he  desired  to  remedy  them;  he  declaimed  against 
them.  Moreover,  were  Christ  on  earth  to-day,  he 
would  most  likely  be  a  Socialist.  But  Christ  was 
too  far  removed  from  modem  Capitalism  to  be  a 
Socialist  of  any  type;  he  could  not  have  been  even  a 
Christian  Socialist,  because  at  Ms  time  neither  Chris- 
tianity nor  Socialism  were  known. 

And  yet,  the  practice  of  the  ideals  which  Christ 


SOCIALISM  AND  IDEALS  79 

preached  will  become  for  the  first  time  possible  under 
Socialism.  So  long  as  an  economic  arrangement 
of  things  forces  every  man  to  be  the  other  man's 
competitor  for  work,  it  is  foolish  to  talk  of  "  love  thy 
neighbor  as  thyself."  Remove  that  competition  and 
the  evils  which  flow  from  it,  and  human  love,  so  long 
suppressed,  but  by  no  means  extinguished,  will  blos- 
som forth  more  beautiful  than  ever.  It  is  no  mere 
paradox  to  say  that  the  golden  rule  cannot  exist 
side  by  side  with  the  rule  of  gold.  The  most  beauti- 
ful religious  injunctions  fail  utterly  when  preached 
in  the  midst  of  an  economic  system  which  renders 
their  practice  suicidal.  Because  men  do  not  practice 
the  actions  which  their  conscience  tells  them  are 
right,  many  say  that  "  human  nature  is  bad  "  and 
cannot  be  changed.  But  no,  mankind  is  essentially 
good.  It  is  the  economic  conditions  that  are  had, 
a/nd  they  can,  and  will,  be  changed!  A  little  thought 
about  your  own  personal  experience  and  actions  will 
demonstrate  to  you  how  true  the  foregoing  is.  Nor 
should  this  be  construed  as  an  attack  on  religion,  or 
the  church.  The  church  has  certainly  erred,  how- 
ever, as  an  organization,  in  being  blind  to  the  eco- 
nomic ills  which  prevented  people  from  living  up  to 
the  best  ideals. 

And  finally,  a  word  about  another  fallacy.  Peo- 
ple are  apt  to  ask,  "  How  will  you  run  this,  that,  and 
the  other  thing  under  Socialism  ?  "  That  is  an  illog- 
ical way  of  looking  at  the  matter.  Knowing  the 
progress  of  social  evolution  in  the  past,  we  have  no 
reason  to  lack  confidence  in  the  future.  Such  things 
have  a  way  of  adjusting  themselves,  as  all  history 
shows.  Washington,  at  the  time  of  the  revolution, 
could  not  point  out  how  this  country  was  to  run  its 
affairs.     But  the  revolution  was  justified,  it  was  ac- 


80  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

complished,  and  affairs  are  being  run  to-day.  The 
past  attended  to  that  problem ;  the  immediate  future 
will  attend  to  ours.  We  are  the  soldiers  of  the  social 
revolution;  let  us  hope  it  will  be  a  bloodless  one, 
but  bloodless  or  not,  it  is  a  just  one.  Science  sup- 
ports it;  idealism  supports  it,  and  it,  in  turn,  gives 
rise  to  a  new  and  better  idealism  than  any  the  world 
has  yet  seen. 

The  idealism  of  Socialism  transcends  the  limita- 
tions of  any  single  creed,  outgrows  the  boundaries  of 
any  single  country,  unites  all  races  in  one  vast,  uni- 
versal bond.  It  embraces  the  entire  world.  What 
more  beautiful  can  there  be  than  a  materialism  which 
breeds  such  idealism;  than  an  idealism  which  is  so 
lofty,  yet  which  not  for  a  moment  deserts  the  ma- 
terial and  scientific  fundamentals  which  make  it  pos- 
sible, actual  and  inevitable.? 


CHAPTER  VI 

The  Socialist  Party  —  What  It  Stands  For  and  How  it  Oper- 
ates— ^Difference  between  Government  Ownership  and  So- 
cialism—  Socialist  Influence  on  Legislation  —  Socialism  and 
War 

WE  have  now  examined  Socialism  in  its  his- 
torical, critical  and  ideal  phases.  We  have 
seen  how  the  same  general  idea  appears  in 
the  light  of  various  standpoints.  We  have  noted 
what  was,  have  felt  what  ought  to  be,  and  have  even 
penetrated  down  to  rock-bottom  causes.  But  the 
mere  knowledge  would  be  useless,  unless  it  were  acted 
upon.  And  the  mere  action,  as  history  proves, 
would  be  equally  useless,  unless  that  action  were  the 
result  of  strong  and  efficient  organization.  Xhe 
Socialist  Party,  then,  represents  the  organized  polit- 
ical effort  of  the  working-class  to  attain  the  pur- 
poses which  we  shall  state  presently. 

As  we  noted  in  the  first  chapter,  these  purposes 
are  affected  by  each  of  the  preceding  phases ;  they 
are  colored  by  these  phases,  and  interpret  them  in 
terms  of  efficient  political  action.  Let  us  now,  to- 
gether, examine  the  official  platform  of  the  Socialist 
Party  of  this  nation.  Let  us  try  to  discover  whether 
we  can  honestly  say  that  any  of  the  other  parties 
has  so  scientific  a  basis,  so  adequate  a  program,  so 
ideal  a  spirit,  so  efficient  an  organization. 

The  platform  adopted  at  Indianapolis,  May, 
1912,^  recognizes  that  the  present  system  has  "  out- 

1  For  all  party  literature,  address  803  West  Madison  St, 
Chicago,  111.    Platforms,  etc.,  are  free. 

81 


82  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

grown  its  historical  function,  and  has  become  utterly 
incapable  of  meeting  the  problems  now  confronting 
society."  You  will  notice,  then,  that  as  a  result  of 
historical  investigation  modem  Socialism  finds  the 
present  system  outgrown;  it  may  once  have  been 
necessary  in  the  progress  of  the  world ;  it  has  accom- 
plished many  things,  but  just  as  Capitalism  itself 
replaced  Feudalism,  so  must  it  in  turn  be  replaced  by 
Socialism.  This  not  alone  because  Socialists  are 
determined  upon  it,  but  because  social  evolution  has 
decreed  it.  The  economic  basis  of  production  has 
changed,  and  as  in  every  previous  instance  in  the 
world's  history,  such  a  change  will  inevitably  be  fol- 
lowed by  a  change  in  social  structures. 

Indeed,  this  is  slowly  taking  place  already,  as  we 
shall  see  when  we  come  to  consider,  briefly.  Socialist 
influence  on  legislation. 

The  Socialist  Platform  then  goes  on  to  state  the 
various  evils  of  the  Capitalist  system  which  we  have 
considered  in  chapter  four,  relating  them,  as  we  did 
there,  to  the  one  central  cause,  the  present  profit- \ 
system.  Concentrated  capital  stretches  its  octopus 
tentacles  in  every  direction,  seeking  to  control  all. 
Labor-saving  machinery,  which  should  prove  a  boon 
to  mankind,  proves  a  curse,  for  instead  of  shorten- 
ing hours  and  causing  more  men  to  be  employed,  it 
throws  out  of  employment  a  vast  number.  Thus 
the  army  of  the  unemployed  receives  new  recruits  to 
its  already  overcrowded  regiments.  The  farmers 
suff^er  from  high  rents,  high  storage  charges,  high 
freight  rates,  high  cost  of  implements.  All  the 
boasted  prosperity,  in  fact,  goes  to  swell  the  coffers 
of  the  owning  class,  at  the  expense  of  the  toiling 
class.  This  is  too  self-evident  to  need  much  argu- 
ment in  these  days. 


THE  PARTY  PLATFORM  83 

After  pointing  out  the  host  of  evils  to  which  our 
own  experience  can  add  its  own  details,  the  platform 
considers  the  powerlessness  of  the  old  parties  (and 
of  the  short-lived  Progressives)  to  cope  with  the  sit- 
uation. Since  the  root  of  the  present-day  evils  is 
the  profit-system  —  that  system  by  which  a  non- 
working  owner  can  make  profits  off  the  back  of  the 
non-owning  toiler  —  any  attempt  to  end  these  ills 
must  strike  at  the  system  itself.  This,  no  other 
party  than  the  Socialist  has  attempted.  The  Re- 
publicans in  general  are  stand-patters;  they  are 
satisfied  with  the  present  order  of  things  and  want 
everybody  else  to  be.  The  Democrats,  representing 
the  smaller  capitalists,  as  the  Republican  party  rep- 
resents the  larger,  would  do  a  little  tariff-tinkering 
here,  a  little  anti-trust  piffling  there,  and  would 
restore  competition.  In  other  words,  while  social 
evolution  is  going  away  from  competition  towards 
cooperation,  this  party  would  turn  the  hands 
of  Time  backwards.  Even  if  this  were  possible,  it 
would  but  take  us  so  much  to  the  rear  of  social 
progress,  and  we  would  have  all  that  same  road  to 
travel  over  again. 

The  day  of  competition  is  dead.  This  is  why 
trust  regulation,  too,  is  a  farcical  failure.  The 
Socialists  do  not  want  to  "  bust  the  trusts."  The 
trusts  are  a  good  thing.  They  represent  the  mod- 
ern cooperative  spirit  in  a  highly  efficient  form,  but 
—  and  here  comes  the  rub  —  they  represent  co- 
operation in  production  only.  They  represent  co- 
operation for  private  profit  only.  They  are  (or 
rather  their  owners  are)  the  greatest  enemies  to  that 
same  principle  of  cooperation  for  which  Socialism 
stands  —  that  same  principle  applied  to  production 
and    distribution  —  that    same    principle,    with    the 


84  ABC  OF  SOCIALISM 

trust  owned  hy  the  nation  of  workers.  The  only 
trouble  with  the  trusts  is  this :  the  workers  create  the 
values,  but  the  private  owners  take  the  profits. 
That  is  why  the  private  owners  do  not  believe  in  the 
workers  owning  the  trusts  —  the  owners  will  lose 
the  profits. 

Let  us  stop  for  a  moment  on  this  important  topic. 

Do  the  owners  of  the  trust  do  any  labor,  beside 
cutting  coupons  ?     No. 

Who  does  all  the  work?     The  workers,  naturally. 

Who  gets  the  profit?  The  owners,  because  of  that 
ownership  and  nothing  else.  Obviously,  the  profits 
should  go  to  the  people  who  create  them,  that  is, 
the  workers.  This  Socialism  proposes  to  effect  hy 
making  the  workers  the  owners.  By  no  means  abol- 
ish the  trusts,  say  the  Socialists.     Let  the  nation 

OWN    THE    TRUSTS    AND    LET    THE    WORKERS    CONTROI. 

THE  NATION.  The  significance  of  the  latter  part  of 
the  preceding  sentence,  and  the  reason  why  mere  gov- 
ernment ownership  of  the  trusts  would  not  be  Social- 
ism, we  shall  presently  discover. 

The  platform  of  1912  then  goes  on  to  affirm  the 
class  struggle,  which  we  have  treated  in  chapter  two. 
Then,  as  we  have  seen  in  chapter  three,  the  platform 
indicts  modem  government  as  the  tool  of  the  owning 
class,  showing  how  the  latter  subsidizes  all  sources 
of  public  education  and  opinion,  how  it  corrupts  the 
departments  of  the  law,  the  courts  and  the  carrying 
out  of  justice,  and  how  it  even  enters  the  sacred  pre- 
cincts of  religion. 

To  oppose  this,  and  to  inaugurate  the  change  all 
the  quicker,  the  platform  calls  for  the  solidarity  of 
the  working  class ;  for  effective  organization  and  a 
solid  front  to  the  common  enemy. 

The  following  excerpt  is  especially  enlightening: 


PARTY  IS  PRACTICAL  85 

The  working  class,  which  includes  all  those  who  are 
forced  to  work  for  a  living,  whether  by  hand  or  by- 
brain,  in  shop,  mine  or  on  the  soil,  vastly  outnumbers 
the  capitalist  class.  Lacking  effective  organization  and 
class  solidarity,  this  class  is  unable  to  enforce  its  will. 
Given  such  class  solidarity  and  effective  organization, 
the  workers  will  have  the  power  to  make  all  laws  and 
control  all  industry  in  their  own  interest. 

The  Socialist  Party  is  the  political  expression  of  the 
economic  interests  of  the  workers.  Its  defeats  have 
been  their  defeats,  and  its  victories  their  victories.  It 
is  a  party  founded  on  the  science  and  laws  of  social 
development.  It  proposes  that,  since  all  social  necessi- 
ties to-day  are  socially  produced,  the  means  of  their 
production  shall  be  socially  owned  and  democratically 
controlled. 

We  are  now  tolerably  familiar  with  the  ultimate 
aim  of  the  Socialist  Party.  The  happy  world  in 
which  this  practical  ideal  will  at  last  have  been  estab- 
lished is  called  by  Socialists  the  "  Cooperative  Com- 
monwealth." 

But  Socialists  are  not  impractical  dreamers. 
They  believe  in  evolution,  and  if  evolution  is  any- 
thing, it  is  gradual.  Socialism  is  hownd  to  come,  de- 
spite all  the  opposition  it  meets  with,  despite  the 
most  intense  pessimism  and  inactivity  of  even  the 
Socialists  themselves.  But  just  as  a  patient  can 
help  his  own  disease  to  go  away,  by  hygienic  living 
and  proper  care,  so,  too,  can  the  coming  of  Social- 
ism be  hastened  by  intelligent  action  and  social  fore- 
sight. In  other  words,  we  can  help  evolution  along, 
since  we  are  the  only  conscious  elements  of  evolution 
that  can  aid  its  social  workings. 

It  is  moreover  true  that  almost  every  step  the 
Capitalist  class  takes  to  make  itself  stronger  makes 
the  coming  of  Socialism  so  much  easier.  The  trusts, 
the  railroads,  the  telegraph,  the  telephone  —  all  of 


86  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

these  have  been  highly  developed  with  the  sole  aim 
of  more  profits,  but  at  the  same  time  all  this  devel- 
opment has  made  the  step  to  Socialism  merely  the 
matter  of  the  organized  workers,  in  the  guise  of  a 
truly  democratic  government,  taking  over  these  func- 
tions from  the  interests  of  a  few  for  the  interests  of 
all. 

The  Socialist  Party  being,  as  we  said,  very  prac- 
tical, provides  for  things  to  be  done  right  away,  as 
well  as  for  ultimate  aims.  It  calls,  in  the  first  place, 
for  immediate  relief  of  the  unemployed  by  the  exten- 
sion of  all  useful  public  works  under  union  condi- 
tions ;  for  unemployment  bureaus  and  such  other 
measures  as  shall  afford  temporary  relief  to  the  suf- 
ferers from  the  misrule  of  the  owning  class.  It  calls 
for  legislation  which  shall  look  to  the  conservation 
of  LIFE  rather  than  of  property,  for  minimum  wage 
scales,  abolition  of  child  labor,  better  working  con- 
ditions, for  old  age  pensions  instead  of  official  char- 
ity, and  a  host  of  other  things  that  have  become 
familiar  to  the  public  only  since  the  Socialist  propa- 
ganda began  to  be  heard.  It  demands  absolute  free- 
dom of  speech,  press  and  assemblage,  a  graduated 
income  tax,  unrestricted  suffrage  for  men  and  women 
alike,  the  initiative,  referendum  and  recall,  the  elec- 
tion of  the  President  and  Vice-President  by  the 
direct  vote  of  the  people,  the  curbing  of  the  right  of 
the  courts  to  issue  injunctions,  and  a  host  of  other 
issues,  all  tending  toward  democracy  in  fact  as  well 
as  in  name. 

The  above  items  are  not  in  themselves  Socialism. 
Far  from  it.  The  Socialists  maintain  a  healthy  dis- 
tinction between  reform  and  socialism.  Reform 
merely  aims  to  change  something  in  the  present  sys- 
tem without  affecting  the  profit-basis  of  the  system ; 


REFORM  DANGERS  87 

socialism  is  after  the  overthrow  of  the  profit-basis 
from  which  all  the  ills  flow  which  reformers  attempt 
to  combat.  Socialists  recognize  that  the  above  de- 
mands, taken  separately,  are  of  a  reform  nature. 
Many  of  these  demands  have  been  taken  over  by  the 
Progressive  Party,  for  instance.  Many  of  them 
have  been  already  enacted  into  legislation.  Social- 
ists look  upon  these  measures  merely  as  steps  that 
clear  the  road  to  the  Cooperative  Commonwealth. 

Not  even  government  ownership  of  the  whole 
nation  would  be  Socialism;  nobody  knows  this  better 
than  the  Socialists.  This  is  why,  and  incidentally 
it  explains  the  latter  half  of  the  capitalized  sentence 
several  pages  back: 

Government  ownership  alone  will  not  abolish  prof- 
its; it  will  merely  yield  the  form  to  the  popular  de- 
mand, and  instead  of  having  a  capitalist  class  com- 
posed of  profit-takers,  you  will  get  the  same  class, 
owning  government  bonds  on  which  they  will  collect 
interest.  Furthermore,  a  political  aristocracy  can 
easily  develop,  unless  the  laws  admitting  to  citizen- 
ship are  truly  democratic.  To-day  the  vast  major- 
ity of  the  people  have  no  share  in  the  government 
whatever,  and  government  enterprise,  as  carried  on, 
is  a  source  of  income,  not  to  the  people,  but  to  those 
portions  of  the  capitalist  class  which  own  govern- 
ment bonds.  As  government  activity  in  industry 
increases,  moreover,  we  find  that  private  ownership 
of  those  industries  is  transformed  into  the  private 
ownership  of  interest-bearing  government  securities. 
In  fact,  such  a  form  of  government  is  rapidly  com- 
ing, and  it  will  be  a  distinct  advantage  to  the  capi- 
talist class,  in  that  their  source  of  income  will  be 
officially  protected  by  the  full  strength  of  the  gov- 
ernment.    The  risk  element  of  modem  business  will 


88  ABC  OF  SOCIALISM 

be  eliminated.^ 

There  is  another  vital  point  to  be  considered  here. 
The  recent  laws  forbidding  government  employees  to 
take  part  in  political  matters,  outside  of  merely  vot- 
ing, will,  under  the  extension  of  government  owner- 
ship, apply  to  a  vast  army  of  citizens.  Such  a  sup- 
pression of  free  speech  is  too  menacing  to  be  over- 
looked. 

It  may  now  be  appreciated  why  Socialists,  in  de- 
manding that  the  nation  own  the  trusts,  are  careful 
to  add.  Let  the  workers  own  the  nation  ! 

We  have  touched,  in  the  first  chapter,  on  the 
method  of  organization  of  the  Socialist  Party.  We 
have  explained  that  the  dues-paying  membership  is 
the  backbone  of  the  movement ;  that  this '  is  the  nu- 
cleus from  which  Socialism  will  radiate,  in  time,  into 
the  minds  of  a  majority  of  the  country's  and  the 
world's  voters.  Any  person  desiring  to  join  the  So- 
cialist Party  signs  the  following  statement,  answer- 
ing, also,  a  few  questions,  such  as  his  age,  whether 
he  is  a  citizen,  etc. : 

"  I,  the  undersigned,  recognizing  the  class  struggle  between 
the  capitalist  class  and  the  working  class,  and  the  necessity  of 
the  working  class  organizing  itself  into  a  political  party  for  the 
purpose  of  obtaining  collective  ownership  and  democratic  ad- 
ministration and  operation  of  the  collectively  used  and  socially 
necessary  means  of  production  and  distribution,  hereby  apply 
for  membership  in  the  Socialist  Party.  I  have  no  relations  (as 
member  or  supporter)  with  any  other  political  party.  I  am 
opposed  to  all  political  organizations  that  support  and  per- 
petuate the  present  capitalist  profit  system,  and  I  am  opposed 

1  Government  ownership  is  much  more  extensive  in  Germany 
and  in  Russia  than  in  this  country,  yet  the  people  there  are 
far  from  enjoying  the  full  product  of  their  labor.  Govern- 
ment Ownership  of  this  nature  is  known  as  State  Socialism  or 
better  still,  State  Capitalism.  The  workers  must  not  be  de- 
ceived by  it.  The  transition  between  Capitalism  and  Socialism 
is  already  assuming  this  fonn. 


PARTY  PRACTICES  89 

to  any  form  of  trading  or  fusing  with  any  such  organizations 
to  prolong  that  system.  In  all  my  political  actions  while  a 
member  of  the  Socialist  Party  I  agree  to  be  guided  by  the 
constitution  and  platform  of  that  party." 

It  will  be  noticed  that,  insofar  as  it  is  possible,  the 
party  practices  in  its  own  organization  that  democ- 
racy which  it  demands  for  the  world  as  a  whole. 
Women  vote  and  participate  in  all  matters  on  equal- 
ity with  the  men.  Non-members  are  always  welcome 
at  meetings ;  there  are  no  "  star-chamber  "  sessions. 
There  is  nothing  to  hide;  no  passwords  or  any  other 
ear-mark  of  a  secret  society.  Long  before  it  became 
law  to  declare  political  expenses  the  party  published 
its  lists  of  disbursements  for  all  purposes,  the  year 
round. 

The  only  campaign  contributor  to  the  Socialist 
Party  is  the  worker.  No  corporations  swell  the 
party  funds,  for  they  know  they  can  expect  nothing 
in  return. 

The  initiative,  referendum  and  recall  operate  in 
the  party  business  just  as  they  will  one  day  operate 
in  our  national  and  our  international  affairs.  To- 
day, in  nations,  a  few  can  declare  war;  that  few 
usually  keep  at  a  good  distance  from  the  battlefield. 
In  a  nation  where  every  man  and  woman  could  vote 
on  the  question  of  war,  doesn't  it  seem  to  you  that 
some  other  method  of  settlement  would  be  found.'' 
Think  you  a  nation's  majority  would  ever  vote  such 
barbarism.?  The  initiative,  referendum  and  recall 
are  democratic  in  their  very  essence.  A  member  in- 
side the  Socialist  Party,  who  has  what  he  thinks 
a  good  idea,  need  not  wait  for  some  "  representa- 
tive "  to  bring  it  up.  He  is  his  own  representative. 
He  brings  it  up,  and  if  it  meets  with  anything  like 
approval,  it  is  in  course  of  time  submitted  to  the 


90  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

other  members  directly.  The  first  member  initiates 
the  idea ;  hence  the  term  initiative ;  it  is  then  referred 
to  the  entire  membership;  hence  the  term  referen- 
dum. Not  only  this,  but  the  recall  (which  word 
explains  its  own  origin)  gives  the  membership  the 
power  to  take  out  of  office  any  person  who  has  abused 
power  or  shown  unfitness  after  his  or  her  election. 
If  this  operated  in  public  affairs,  there  would  be  very 
little  of  the  feeling  among  officials  which  finds  ex- 
pression in  some  such  form*  as  this :  "  Well,  I'm 
elected  for  four  years.  Deuce  take  the  people ;  now 
I'm  here  and  I'll  do  as  I  please."  In  some  states 
where  the  recall  is  already  in  operation,  judges  who 
would  otherwise  have  served  their  unjust  terms  for 
life,  have  been  removed  by  the  people.  Putting 
judges,  especially,  within  the  power  of  recall  brings 
justice  nearer  the  people.  The  general  effect  of  all 
three  devices  is  to  bring  the  people  closer  to  their 
government  and  the  government  closer  to  the  people. 
We  have  seen  that  the  recommendations  in  the  So- 
cialist Platform  have  for  their  purpose  the  smooth- 
ing of  the  road  to  Socialism.  People  often  say, 
without  thinking,  "  I  want  something  now.  That's 
why  I  vote  the  old  party  ticket  instead  of  yours. 
Socialism  is  all  right,  but  it's  too  far  ahead  of  the 
times."  This  is  sheer  nonsense  for  several  reasons. 
Anything  that  helps  to  strengthen  the  old  parties 
keeps  Socialism  so  much  further  away.  Moreover, 
the  only  "  something  now  "  that  you  get  by  voting 
an  old  ticket  is  a  repetition  of  the  dose  that  you 
received  before.  One  of  the  beauties  of  the  Socialist 
program  is  that,  not  only  does  it  stand  for  much 
more  now  than  the  others  dare  to,  but  all  of  those 
things  which  it  demands  immediately  make  the  transi- 
tion to  the  Socialist  state  so  much  easier. 


PARTY  PRACTICES  91 

The  growing  Socialist  vote  has  already  scared  the 
old  parties  into  doing  something  now  which  they 
never  would  have  done  had  that  vote  remained  as 
small  as  in  the  early  days.  Our  advance  in  labor 
laws,  in  factory  conditions,  in  safeguards  for  life 
and  limb,  in  the  spread  of  woman's  suffrage,  is  all 
due  primarily  to  the  education  and  agitation  of  the  /HW^ 
Socialist  Party.  If  you  want  something  now,  that 
is  the  best  of  reasons  for  voting  for  Socialism,  which 
will  get  that  something  now  not  as  a  sop  thrown  to 
quiet  a  dog  but  as  a  preliminary  to  getting  it  all 
later:  all  that  the  worker  earns  —  the  full  social 
product  of  his  labor. 

A  vote  for  the  old  parties  makes  them'  stronger; 
it  gets  you  nothing  now  and  keeps  you  from  getting 
anything  later.  A  vote  for  Socialism  gets  you  some- 
thing now  (either  scaring  the  old  parties  into  doing 
it,  or  doing  it  directly  in  case  a  Socialist  administra- 
tion is  elected)  and  clears  the  way  for  the  rest  of  the 
program.  Is  not  this  the  plainest  of  common  sense? 
A  Socialist  vote  must  not  register  merely  dissatis- 
faction ;  it  must  be  intelligent  dissatisfaction. 


Thus  we  see  that  the  program  of  the  Socialist 
Party  is  the  result  of  a  historical,  critical  and  ideal 
study  of  society:  that  it  is  the  official  word  of  the 
organized  nucleus  of  workers  who  aim  to  bring  about, 
by  education,  organization  and  agitation,  the  reali- 
ties and  ideals  of  the  future  Socialist  commonwealth; 
that  they  are  working  out  these  aims  in  their  own 
organization  so  far  as  it  is  possible;  that  they  are 
not  sacrificing  the  present  to  the  future,  but  that  the 
present  is  of  necessity  paving  the  way  to  that  future. 
We  thus  have  a  most  powerful  union  of  the  practical 


9^  ABC  OF  SOCIALISM 

and  the  ideal  in  a  purpose  that  often  calls  for  the 
greatest  sacrifices,  even  as  it  promises  the  greatest 
hoons.  For  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  the  world 
the  oppressed  class  stands  forth  conscious  of  its 
class  interests ;  conscious  that  by  its  victory  alone 
can  the  class  struggle  be  ended,  and  classes  of  all 
kinds  abolished,  since  the  cause  of  these  modern 
classes  will  have  come  to  an  end.  For  the  first  time 
that  oppressed  class  stands  efficiently  organized, 
with  its  knowledge  of  the  past  as  its  surest  guide  to 
the  present  and  strongest  guarantee  of  the  future. 

We  have  had  something  to  say  in  chapter  three 
about  war.  At  present  it  is,  and  for  many  years  to 
come  it  will  be,  a  burning  question  in  more  senses 
than  one.  That  which  Socialists  call  class-con- 
sciousness is  becoming  remarkably  evident  in  the 
world-wide  opposition  to  war.  A  further  indication 
as  to  how  Socialism  looks  upon  the  greatest  of  world- 
conflicts  will  bring  out  more  strongly  the  value  of  the 
political  party  and  of  class-conscious  intelligence. 

It  has  been  said  that  the  war  between  the  Allies 
and  the  combined  forces  of  Austria-Hungary  and 
Germany  was  caused  by  "  the  violation  of  Belgium's 
neutrality,"  by  "  secret  diplomacy,"  by  "  Prussian 
militarism  "  and  a  host  of  other  things.  These  are 
not  the  causes  of  the  war.  Had  the  violation  of  Bel- 
gium's neutrality  been  to  England's  advantage,  she 
would  have  acted  just  as  did  Germany.  The  only 
trouble  with  Prussian  militarism,  in  the  Allies'  eyes, 
is  that  it  is  developed  more  efficiently  than  English, 
French  or  Russian  militarism.  Does  not  militarism 
exist  in  all  countries,  and  for  the  same  purpose? 
And  why  does  "  secret  diplomacy  "  exist  ?     Back  of 

ALL  STANDS  THE  PROFIT  SYSTEM  ! 

If  it  were  not  for  profits,  nations  (that  is,  the  con- 


CLASS  CONSCIOUSNESS  93 

trolling  capitalists  in  them)  would  not  desire  foreign 
possessions  as  markets  for  the  home  surplus.  If  it 
were  not  for  profits,  the  nations,  as  above  inter- 
preted, would  not  compete  in  times  of  peace,  thus  lead- 
ing to  the  inevitable  warfare  that  such  competition 
brings.  And  the  part  that  the  workers  here  play 
would  be  an  intensely  laughable  comedy,  were  it  not 
so  tragic. 

First,  the  worker  is  exploited  at  home.  That  is, 
he  is  paid  much  less  than  the  values  he  creates  by  his 
toil.  His  masters,  as  a  class,  heap  up  such  large 
profits  that  they  must  re-invest.  They  do  so.  In- 
vestments at  home  get  crowded;  outside  fields  must 
be  reached.  This  is  called,  "  developing  a  foreign 
market."  Now  other  capitalists  in  other  countries 
are  doing  the  same  thing.  It  makes  no  difference 
under  what  flag  capital  flies  ;  it  is  looking  for  profits, 
and  will  change  flags  if  more  profits  are  to  be  got  that 
way.  This  is  exactly  what  happened  recently  (1914?) 
when  it  became  more  profitable,  as  a  result  of  the 
war's  outbreak,  to  fly  an  American  flag  from  mer- 
chant ships.  Before  then,  patriotic  American  owners 
flew  foreign  flags  from  those  same  ships.  The  capi- 
talists of  all  nations  are  after  the  same  thing,  then  — 
PROFIT.  They  all  come  to  the  point  where  the  foreign 
market  is  needed;  they  can't  all  have  it  at  once,  so 
they  fight  for  it.  But  they  know  that  if  the  issue 
were  put  thus  rawly  before  the  workers'  eyes,  there'd 
be  a  precious  small  army  and  navy  to  do  the  fighting. 
So,  fooling  themselves,  and  the  same  workers  whom 
they  rob  during  peace,  they  cook  up  a  dish  of  "  pa- 
triotism," "  national  honor  "  and  other  ingredients. 
Secret  diplomacy  plays  its  part  by  keeping  from  the 
people  all  the  essential  moves  in  the  war  which  the 
PEOPLE  alone  can  fight;  then  the  press,  the  pulpit 


94  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

(the  latter  often  deceived,  as  well  as  consciously  de- 
ceiving) and  all  other  channels  of  public  opinion,  are 
filled  with  the  poison  of  jingoism;  the  nations  are 
inflamed,  and,  for  the  most  part,  really  think  them- 
selves in  the  right.  For  being  the  creatures  of  their 
economic  environment,  they  have  been  unknowingly 
deceived. 

Socialism  says  that  the  interests  of  the  workers  are 
international,  as  workers.  Religion  has  nothing  to 
do  with  the  case;  you  may  be  whatever  you  please, 
and  another  rich  whatever-you-please  will  overwork 
and  underpay  you.  You  may  be  of  a  certain  race; 
but  another  rich  person  of  that  same  race  will  under- 
pay and  overwork  you.  You  are  overworked  and 
underpaid  not  because  of  your  race  or  religion  or 
color,  but  because  of  your  economic  position ;  because 
you  are  a  worker,  and  not  an  owner.  As  a  member 
OF  THE  WORKING  ciAss  you  are  exploited,  the  world 
over ;  as  a  member  of  the  working  class  you  can  end 
that  exploitation  the  world  over  by  international  co- 
operation. 

What  real  quarrel  has  the  German  worker  with  his 
French  brother?  The  Russian  worker  with  his 
Austrian  brother?  Aren't  they  both  oppressed  by 
the  same  evil  conditions,  from  the  same  evil  causes? 
What  earthly  sense  have  they  to  go  shooting  each 
other  to  pieces  ?  Will  they  gain  by  any  "  victory  "  ? 
Not  at  all.  The  owning  class  will  make  any  gains 
that  are  to  be  made.  The  working  class  will  con- 
tribute all  the  losses,  not  only  in  war  indemnities, 
taxes  and  so  forth,  but  in  flesh  and  blood. 

A  world  without  profits  means  a  world  without 
war;  a  world  with  profits  means  a  world  with  con- 
tinual war  in  one  form  or  another.  There  is  no  way 
out  of  it  except  to  abolish  the  profit  system  and 


CLASS  CONSCIOUSNESS  96 

substitute  Socialism.  It  may  take  bloodshed  to  do 
this ;  if  so,  it  will  be  blood  shed  in  a  good  cause,  at 
least,  from  which  the  workers  will  benefit.  But  it 
need  not  take  bloodshed.  Especially  here  in  Amer- 
ica, where  the  ballot  is  accessible  to  so  many,  the 
bullet  should  gradually  become  a  thing  of  the  past. 
Capitalism  is  getting  to  understand  that  its  interests 
are  international,  to  the  point  that  it  is  even  dis- 
covering that  war  is  a  waste  —  not  of  human  life  — 
but  of  profits.  Should  this  be  so.  Capitalism  will 
even  go  to  the  extent  of  abolishing  war,  but  not  the 
PROFIT  SYSTEM,  which  is  Capitalism  itself.  It  re- 
mains for  the  workers  to  discover  their  international 
interests.  Whether  the  social  revolution  will  be  a 
bloody  one  or  a  peaceful  one  depends  largely  upon 
the  intelligence  of  the  working  class  of  the  world  and 
the  quickness  with  which  it  embraces  Socialism. 


CHAPTER  VII 

Objections  to  Socialism  —  Their  Assumptions  and  Errors 

THE  objections  to  Socialism  are  as  numerous  as 
ignorance,  malice  and  misunderstanding  can 
make  them.  On  the  one  hand  they  come  from 
beneficiaries  of  the  present  system  who  cannot  but 
believe  that  what  is  to  their  interest  must  necessarily 
be  best  for  the  world  at  large.  They  come  also  from 
those  who  enjoy  the  advantages  of  the  present  system 
and  who  would  willfully  deceive  the  workers,  lest  the 
latter  wrest  from  them  all  their  unjust  powers. 
They  come,  too,  from  the  ignorant,  who  merely  ape 
the  objections  of  the  upper  classes,  just  as  they  ape 
their  manners.  Objections  to  Socialism,  finally, 
come  from  honest  men  and  women,  who  want  the 
truth  as  eagerly  as  do  Socialists,  and  who  urge  their 
opposition  with  a  sincerity  that  makes  them  oppo- 
nents that  are  respected  and  admired  by  Socialists  as 
well  as  the  sincere  public  at  large. 

We  shall  consider,  in  this  chapter,  a  host  of  objec- 
tions to  Socialism;  not  necessarily  all,  however,  as 
that  is  neither  feasible  nor  necessary.  In  consider- 
ing the  objections,  the  purpose  is  twofold:  first,  of 
course,  to  answer  them;  and  secondly,  to  show  the 
logical  way  of  treating  all  such  opposition.  During 
the  preceding  chapters  we  have  touched  upon  objec- 
tions here  and  there,  and  answered  them,  thus  antici- 
pating something  of  what  we  have  to  say  here.  First 
to  be  considered  are  the  more  popular  and  more 
foolish  arguments.     That  these  have  come  from  the 


"  POPULAR  "  OBJECTIONS  97 

mouths  of  men  and  women  in  high  public  esteem  ac- 
counts for  their  popularity,  but  in  no  wise  does  it 
diminish  their  folly. 

Atheism.  The  old  charge  that  Socialism  is  un- 
godly arises  from  several  sources.  It  will  be  remem- 
bered that  before  the  public  school  system  was 
inaugurated  in  this  country,  its  sponsors  were  at- 
tacked with  the  same  charges  as  are  flung  at  Socialists 
by  the  ignoramuses  of  to-day.  This  holds  true  of 
the  Abolitionists,  who  were  similarly  attacked. 
Lincoln,  the  martyr,  was  not  free  from  the  vilifica- 
tions of  opponents  who  saw  in  his  liberal  policy  the 
seeds  of  not  only  atheism,  but  insanity.  Anything 
which  disturbs  the  old  order  of  things  is  looked  upon 
by  the  patrons  of  that  old  order  as  being  ungodly 
and  anarchistic.  God,  to  such  opponents,  would 
seem  always  to  be  on  the  side  of  the  old  and  opposed 
to  the  new,  yet  when  the  new  triumphs,  people  wonder 
how  the  old  could  ever  have  been  defended. 

The  Socialist  party  being  authority  for  what 
Socialism  is,  it  is  enough  to  say  that  it  has  never  made 
any  official  declaration  of  atheism,  agnosticism, 
Buddhism,  or  anything  else  religious.  Religion  has 
been  declared  by  Socialists  to  be  a  private  issue ;  the 
essential  world-wide  democracy  of  Socialism  is  abso- 
lutely opposed  to  prescribing  religious  belief  or  non- 
belief.  Socialism  is  a  political  and  economical  mat- 
ter pure  and  simple;  its  leaders  may  think  as  they 
please ;  they  cannot  force  those  thoughts  upon  others. 
We  have  given,  in  chapter  six,  the  exact  words  which 
you  must  sign  if  you  wish  to  become  a  member  of  the 
party.  All  the  official  literature  is  open  to  you ;  it 
is  for  you  yourself  to  settle  the  atheism  folly.  Re- 
member: Socialists  do  not  forfeit  their  right  of  indi- 
viduality when  they  join  the  party.     Prominent  ones 


98  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

have  written,  and  obscure  ones  may  write,  anti-re- 
ligious or  pro-religious  books.  They  do  so  cbs  indi- 
viduals; it  is  their  perfect  right.  As  Socialists,  they 
would  be  the  first  to  admit  that  they  are  concerned 
onlt/  with  the  industrial  emancipation  of  the  working- 
class  through  the  policies  of  the  Socialist  party,  and 
that  is  the  whole  story. 

Free  Love.  This  is  the  twin  brother  of  the  atheism 
charge.  Consider  how  foolish  it  is  in  origin  and  in 
assumptions.  This  argument,  like  the  preceding,  has 
been  hurled  against  all  preachers  of  the  new  as 
against  the  old.  Of  course  "  free  love  "  here  means 
"  lust,"  since  real  love  itself  cannot  be  bought,  and  is, 
therefore,  in  a  most  beautiful  sense,  free.  But  lust, 
on  the  other  hand,  must  purchase  its  pleasures.  Is 
not  this  the  story  of  prostitution?  The  opponents 
who  urge  this  objection  to  Socialism,  however,  mean 
this :  that  under  Socialism  men  and  women  will  mingle 
freely,  with  no  sexual  restraint  or  legal  restriction. 
This  objection  is  a  confused  memory  of  Plato's  com- 
munism and  similar  institutions,  coupled  with  a  mis- 
understanding of  the  significance  of  modem  marriage. 

We  know  from  chapter  five  that  Plato's  commun- 
ism has  nothing  to  do  with  Socialism.  We  ought  also 
to  know  that  under  modern  conditions  very  little  love 
can  be  at  the  basis  of  marriage,  since  so  many  women 
are  forced  to  marry  for  a  home,  while  in  addition, 
prostitution  competes  with  every  wife  for  her  hus- 
band's manhood.  Moreover,  Socialists  are  not  afraid 
to  say  what  they  mean ;  they  have  said  so  much  that 
is  revolutionary,  that  if  they  had  this,  too,  to  say, 
they  would  say  so  openly.  How  under  the  sun  could 
Socialism,  even  if  it  were  on  the  program,  force 
people  to  live  without  sexual  restraint,  if  they  did 
not  wish  to  ^     Indeed,  consider  the  lack  of  sexual  re- 


«  POPULAR  "  OBJECTIONS  99 

straint  practiced  to-day  by  the  most  determined 
enemies  of  Socialism,  and  then  ask  yourself  if  some- 
thing isn't  wrong  somewhere  with  this  most  foolish 
of  objections.  It  is  by  no  means  too  optimistic  to 
say  that  under  Socialism  sexual  life  will  be  purer 
than  at  any  other  time  in  the  world's  history ;  for  the 
first  time,  woman's  real  equality  with  man  will  save 
her  from  prostitution,  from  loveless  marriage,  from 
all  the  conditions  that  breed  family  disruption. 

Socialism  Against  the  Home.  This  argument  is 
the  result  of  the  preceding  twin-objections.  A  god- 
less, sex-unrestrained  world  can  produce  no  home,  is 
the  cry.  But  inasmuch  as  Socialism  has  nothing  to 
do,  one  way  or  the  other,  with  godlessness,  and  inas- 
much as  Socialism,  in  its  attitude  towards  and  effect 
on  real  love  will  be  the  very  opposite  to  what  its 
opponents  claim,  this  objection  sinks  beneath  its  own 
weight.  Many  things  have  happened  in  the  past  to 
modify  the  home  as  an  institution.  Many  things  are 
happening  to  it  to-day,  as  a  result  of  Capitalism's 
terrible  sway.  Vast  numbers  have  no  home;  vast 
numbers  depend  on  charity;  homes  are  broken  up 
every  day  by  unnecessary  poverty.  Such  conditions 
as  these  Socialism  will  remedy,  and  not  perpetuate, 
since  it  stands  as  the  irreconcilable  foe  of  Capitalism. 
So,  rather  than  being  against  the  home,  and  "  break- 
ing it  up,"  Socialism  wants  to  rebuild  the  homes  that 
Capitalism  has  shattered. 

"  Dividi/ng  Up"  This  argument,  that  Socialism 
believes  in  dividing  up  all  the  wealth  of  the  world 
equally,  comes  from  brains  of  the  same  intelligence 
as  the  ones  which  repeat  the  objections  just  con- 
sidered. Such  a  purpose  has  never  been  promulgated 
by  the  Socialist  party  of  any  country  in  the  world. 
This  is  also  a  confused  remembrance  of  some  com- 


100  ABC  OF  SOCIALISM 

munistic  practices.  Socialism  does  demand,  and  its 
effect  will  be  to  inaugurate,  equal  opportunity.  It  is 
so  ridiculous  when  a  workingman  (who  is  robbed 
every  day  of  his  life,  by  a  conscienceless  system,  of 
most  of  the  things  that  make  life  worth  while) 
exclaims :  "  Catch  me  dividing  up  my  wealth  with  a 
hobo  who  has  done  nothing  at  all !  "  Precious  little 
wealth  he  has  to  "  divide  up."  The  dividing  up  is 
done  by  the  capitalists,  in  the  shape  of  dividends  — 
the  very  word  means  "  something  that  is  to  be  di- 
vided !  "  No,  Socialism  has  said  nothing  about  divid- 
ing up  the  world's  wealth  equally.  Such  questions 
will  be  of  minor  importance  when  men  and  women,  as 
a  result  of  changed  conditions,  need  not  worry  about 
finding  a  job  or  receiving  decent  wages  and  healthy 
conditions. 

Against  Private  Property.  The  claim  that  Social- 
ism is  opposed  to  private  property  has  led  to  some 
of  the  most  ridiculous  statements  that  anti-Socialist 
literature  knows.  This  claim,  like  so  many  others, 
arises  from  a  confusion  between  Socialism  and  com- 
munism, and  also  from  a  misunderstanding  of  the 
term  "  private  property  "  as  applied  to  capital. 

We  have  seen  that  it  is  communism  which  believes 
in  dividing  up  all  belongings ;  that  it  is  communism 
which  believes  in  common  ownership  of  all  property. 
The  only  kind  of  private  property  that  Socialism  will 
abolish  is  that  kind  which  is  used  to  produce  profits. 
Socialism  does  not,  as  foolish  writers  have  written, 
believe  that  the  state  should  own  your  toothbrush 
and  your  fine-comb.  It  does  believe  that  the  making 
of  toothbrushes  and  the  making  of  fine-combs,  and  all 
other  commodities,  as  well  as  their  transportation, 
etc.,  should  be  a  worker-government  affair,  with 
goods  made  for  use  and  not  for  profit.     The  evil  of 


"  POPULAR  "  OBJECTIONS  Wi 

great  fortunes  is  not  the  mere  greatness  of  them,  or 
the  inequality  of  wealth  that  they  cause,  but  the  fact 
that  they  can  be  used  to  accumulate  still  greater  for- 
tunes for  the  owners,  at  the  expense  of  the  workers. 
Every  cent  of  interest  collected  by  a  non-worker,  by 
reason  of  his  ownership  of  money,  comes  from  the 
sweat  of  a  toiler  who  is  being  robbed  of  part  of  what 
he  produces  in  order  to  pay  that  interest. 

Socialism,  then,  far  from  being  opposed  to  private 
property  in  the  personal  sense  of  the  word,  desires 
that  more  of  it  be  owned  hy  the  class  that  produces  it! 
The  workers  make  the  goods  that  eventually  become 
the  private  property  of  somebody  or  other ;  but  little 
indeed  of  what  they  make  comes  to  their  own  homes. 
Socialism  stands  for  the  public  ownership  and  control 
of  all  socially  necessary  industries.  The  important 
words  in  that  sentence  are  "  socially  necessary  indus- 
tries." Your  piano  is  yours;  Socialism  is  glad  you 
have  it,  so  to  speak;  Socialism  doesn't  want  it. 
What  Socialism  is  after  is  the  industry  of  piano- 
making;  it  will  see  to  it  that  no  private  owner  uses 
that  industry,  or  any  other,  for  grinding  profits 
out  of  underpaid  workers ;  it  will  see  to  it  that  such 
an  industry,  as  well  as  all  the  other  socially  necessary 
activities  (railroads,  mines,  factories,  means  of  com- 
munication, etc.),  will  be  owned  by  the  nation  as  a 
whole  and  operated  for  the  nation  as  a  whole. 

Socialism  is  Too  Material.  We  have  touched,  in 
chapter  five,  upon  one  of  the  reasons  why  Socialism 
has  been  accused  of  gross  materialism.  Socialism, 
as  we  have  learned,  does  not  concern  itself  with  mat- 
ters spiritual,  although  it  is  true  that  under  Social- 
ism people  will  have  more  time  to  worship  and  more 
money  to  spend,  if  they  so  wish,  on  those  same 
churches  that  to-day  are  being  abandoned  through 


10^  ABC  OF  SOCIALISM 

lack  of  support.  Socialism,  being  a  politico-indus- 
trial movement,  is,  as  far  as  these  things  are  material, 
a  material  affair.  It  is  rather  peculiar,  too,  that 
many  of  the  very  accusers  of  materialism  are  the  first 
to  ask,  "  How  are  you  going  to  determine  people's 
pay  under  Socialism? "  The  word  material  has 
many  different  meanings ;  if  it  means  non-spiritual, 
then  Socialism  is  certainly  material;  it  does  not  pre- 
tend to  meddle  in  pure  religion.  But  if  by  material- 
ism is  meant  sordid^  coarse,  caring  only  for  the  body 
and  not  the  mind,  then  Socialism  is  clearly  not  in 
that  class.  The  effect  of  Socialism  will  be  to  give 
people  more  time  for  mental  culture,  for  higher 
things  than  living  out  a  weary  existence  as  a  wage- 
slave.  Just  as  the  body  is  the  material  structure 
upon  which  the  soul  of  man  in  its  highest  manifesta- 
tions of  music,  art  and  science  is  nourished,  so  will 
Socialism  provide  the  world  with  a  material  structure 
upon  which  the  world-soul  will  rise  to  ever  higher  and 
higher  manifestations  of  its  limitless  possibilities. 
For  Socialism  is  material  in  its  relation  to  the  world 
only  as  the  body  is  material  in  its  relation  to  the 
mind ;  it  is  a  sane,  healthy  and  necessary  materialism^ 
having  nothing  to  do  with  those  meanings  of  the  word 
which  denote  sordid  preoccupation  with  lower  pleas- 
ures. This  latter  form  of  materialism  has  been 
bred  by  Capitalism,  and  will  die  out  only  with  the 
inauguration  of  Socialism.  Nothing  can  be  more 
material,  in  the  bad  sense,  than  the  merciless  enslave- 
ment of  man  by  man  which  Capitalism  renders  neces- 
sary. Nothing  can  be  less  material,  in  such  a  sense, 
than  Socialism's  aim  to  abolish  such  enslavement. 

"  You  Can't  Change  Human  Nature.^'  This 
phrase  used  to  be  more  common  than  it  is ;  it  is  still 
dinned  into  Socialist  ears.     What  is  education  but  a 


"POPULAR"  OBJECTIONS  103 

change  in  human  nature?  Do  not  human  beings 
give  their  lives  for  each  other  in  danger,  as  well  as 
enslave  each  other  in  business?  Is  human  nature  a 
fixed  quantity,  a  simple  essence,  or  is  it  the  accumu- 
lation of  thousands  of  years  of  experience  —  a  com- 
plex, varying  quality  ?  Is  it  really  so  human  to  cause 
the  untold  misery  of  to-day  ?  Is  this  the  "  human- 
ity "  which  preachers  defend  and  warring  nations 
claim  they  are  fighting  for?  Is  it  this  "  humanity  " 
which  humane  societies  are  formed  for  the  purpose  of 
conserving?  Is  there  not  a  difference  between  the 
"  humanity  "  of  a  hungry  man  who  will  steal,  or  even 
kill  for  food,  and  that  same  man,  satisfied  and  seeking 
to  spread  his  satisfaction? 

Human  nature  is  what  the  surroundings  .make  it. 
No*"!mm  or  woman  is  ahsoluiely  individual.  Into 
their  blood  has  gone  the  heredity  of  parents,  grand- 
parents and  previous  generations.  Into  their  minds 
go  the  ideas  and  customs  of  the  present  social  en- 
vironment. Few  can  overcome  these  influences  in 
part;  none  can  overcome  them  entirely. 

Human  nature,  indeed,  is  often  a  class  affair,  just 
as  are  heredity  and  environment.  The  "  human  na- 
ture "  of  the  rich  is  in  many  respects  different  from 
the  "  human  nature  "  of  the  poor.  The  only  respect 
in  which  all  mankind  can  be  said  to  be  the  same  is  in 
the  instinct  of  self-preservation  and  preservation  of 
loved  ones.  And  that  instinct  of  self-preservation 
leads  to  the  non-working  owner  to  want  more  profit, 
while  the  all-producing  toiler  wants  more  wages. 
Then  comes  the  inevitable  class-struggle,  as  we  have 
seen. 

Socialism  does  not  depend  upon  any  violent  change 
in  this  fundamental  instinct  of  self-preservation. 
Indeed,  it  appeals  to  that  instinct  in  the  toilers;  it 


io4j  a  b  c  of  socialism 

educates  it ;  it  develops  it  and  gives  it  interpreta- 
tion ;  it  prevents  that  instinct,  as  far  as  possible,  from 
assuming  violent  forms.  While  there  is  hunger,  it 
will  be  human  nature  to  steal;  when  there  will  be 
plenty,  that  phase  of  supposedly  ineradicable  human 
nature  will  disappear.  When  the  "  can't-change- 
liuman-nature "  opponents  make  their  objections, 
they  forget  that  the  world  is  full  of  misdirected  altru- 
ism, misdirected  self-sacrifice  —  much  more  than 
Socialism  asks  for  to-day,  and  certainly  more  than 
will  be  required  when  Socialism  comes  into  its  own. 

"  Who'll  Do  the  Dirty  Work?  "  This  is  another 
of  the  posers  that  believers  in  the  Cooperative  Com- 
monwealth are  asked.  And  frequently  it  is  asked  by 
men  and  women  who  are  doing  the  dirty  work  to-day, 
let  alone  who  will  do  it  under  Socialism.  The  idea 
in  their  minds  is  this :  people  will  not  do  disagreeable 
work  unless  well  paid  for  it;  therefore,  under  Social- 
ism, people  being  well  paid,  will  disdain  to  do  the  more 
disagreeable  labor.  All  of  which  would  be  very  nice, 
if  it  were  sensible.  But  it  isn't.  In  the  first  place, 
the  disagreeable  work  to-day  is  the  lowest-paid;  ac- 
cording to  our  questioners  it  should  be  the  highest. 
And  the  low  pay  is  not  determined  by  the  nature  of 
the  work  at  all,  but  by  the  number  of  men  and  women 
who  are  competing  for  the  chance  to  earn  a  living. 
Are  sewer-diggers  our  highest  paid  men  to-day? 
Most  "  dirty  work,"  so-called,  is  unskilled  labor ;  un- 
skilled labor  is  numerous  —  hence  the  low  pay. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  go  into  details  about  the 
future.  The  future  has  an  accommodating  way  of 
taking  care  of  itself.  Such  questions  as,  "  How  will 
pay  be  determined  under  Socialism.'^  "  are  really  not 
so  important  as  they  look.  The  important  thing  is, 
that  with  the  system's  robbery  abolished,  the  workers 


«  POPULAR  "  OBJECTIONS  105 

will  get  what  they  really  earn  as  social  producers, 
and  that  means  they  will  be  much  better  off  than  to- 
day. Exactly  how  much  better  off,  only  the  future 
can  tell.  We  need  worry  very  little  about  that! 
Similarly,  the  future  will  take  care  of  the  "  dirty 
work  "  question.  With  the  enormous  strides  made  in 
machinery  and  invention,  most  of  it  may  be  done 
through  these  agencies.  The  "  dirty  work  "  of  to- 
day could  be  made  much  more  clean  if  the  contractors 
cared  less  for  profits  and  more  for  human  considera- 
tions. What  is  more,  there  is  a  good  deal  work  more 
"  dirty  "  than  the  kind  which  the  questioners  have  in 
mind.  Experimentation  with  germs,  investigation  of 
mines,  care  of  certain  diseases  —  these  are  a  sample 
of  the  kind  of  dirty  work  which  men  reckon  it  an 
honor  to  carry  on.  It  is  higher  paid  than  the  other 
kind,  not  because  it  is  "  dirtier,"  but  because  there  is 
less  competition  in  that  line. 

So  that  we  see  this  objection  to  be  based  upon  the 
erroneous  assumption  that  the  nature  of  work  de- 
termines its  reward ;  also,  that  the  question  asks  too 
great  exactness  from  the  future.  If  the  only  objec- 
tion against  Socialism  offered  by  the  performers  of 
to-day's  "  dirty  work  "  lies  here,  they  need  quickly 
dispel  it.  For,  even  should  there  be  no  change  in 
inventions  and  machinery,  that  same  work  will  re- 
ceive more  pay  than  to-day  because  it  will  be  carried 
on  by  the  nation,  for  the  service  of  all  and  not  for 
the  private  profits  of  a  few. 

Government  Ownership  a  Failure.  A  good  many 
people,  not  knowing  the  distinction  between  govern- 
ment ownership  and  Socialism  which  we  have  given 
in  chapter  six,  regard  arguments  against  Govern- 
ment Ownership  as  arguments  against  Socialism. 
We  have  learned  that  this  is  far  from  logical.     Social- 


106  ABC  OF  SOCIALISM 

ists  approve  government  ownership,  but  only  as  a 
step  towards  Socialism.  It  is  not  true,  however,  as 
has  been  averred  by  some,  that  government  owner- 
ship is  a  failure.  It  is  a  well-known  fact,  for 
instance,  right  here  in  the  United  States,  that  our 
postal  system  would  run  at  a  profit,  were  it  not  for 
the  excessive  rates  charged  the  government  by  the 
railroads.  This  has  been  shown  in  more  than  one 
official  report  by  United  States  Postmaster  Generals. 
For  instance,  Carl  D.  Thompson,  Director  of  the 
Information  Department  of  the  Socialist  Party  of 
the  United  States,  has  refuted  the  arguments  against 
government  ownership  in  his  pamphlet  entitled  "  Pub- 
lic Ownership  of  Railways."  He  has  also  shown  in 
the  Socialist  Congressional  Campaign  book  for  1914 
that  the  railroads  of  this  country  have  managed  by 
one  means  or  another  to  keep  the  charges  of  carrying 
mail  far  above  every  other  rate.  "  They  get  from 
two  to  four  times  as  much  for  hauling  mails  as  they 
do  from  express  companies  for  equal  service.  The 
railroads,  moreover,"  he  continues,  "  rob  the  gov- 
ernment of  $5,386,000  by  charging  in  rentals  for  cars 
each  year  more  than  the  cars  are  worth  altogether." 
(See  report  of  Postmaster  General  Vilas,  1887.)  In 
addition  to  this,  the  privately-owned  railroads  cheat 
the  government  by  a  clever  system  of  false  weight. 
(See  report  of  Postmaster  General  Wanamaker, 
1893.)  Obviously,  with  the  railroads  in  the  govern- 
ment's hands,  even  under  the  present  system,  the 
postal  department  would  be  a  paying  institution,  and 
the  railroads  would  give  better  service  in  every  way. 
The  same  has  been  shown  in  other  industries. 

It  is  of  course  natural  to  find  many  of  the  defend- 
ers of  Capitalism  against  government  ownership,  for. 
the  same  reason  that  Socialists  favor  it ;  it  is  a  step 


ACADEMIC  OBJECTIONS  107 

towards  Socialism.  At  the  same  time,  we  should  be 
on  our  guard  against  the  developments  outlined  in 
chapter  six. 

Socialism  Causes  Class-Antagonism.  Of  course, 
the  obvious  answer  to  this  objection  is  that  Socialism 
merely  points  out  the  fact  that  classes  exist,  and 
explains  why.  Socialism,  as  we  shall  see  in  consider- 
ing another  objection  presently,  aims  to  abolish  all 
classes  through  the  victory  of  the  working  class. 
Classes,  as  we  found  in  our  historical  survey,  have 
always  existed  in  antagonism  to  each  other.  Capi- 
talism has  given  the  class  struggle  a  violent  impulse, 
and  Socialism  gives  to  the  most  important  class  in 
the  struggle  a  well-defined  program  and  purpose.  It 
stirs  up  not  class  hatred,  but  class-consciousness, 
class-solidarity.  It  recognizes  that  the  capitalists, 
as  a  class,  are  much  more  aware  of  their  interests  than 
are  the  workers,  as  a  class.  It  educates  the  workers 
in  their  class  interests.  But  Socialism  cannot  cause 
class  antagonism  any  more  than  a  doctor  can  cause  a 
disease  when  he  examines  a  patient  and  tells  him  he  is 
ill.  The  doctor  diagnoses  the  disease  already  there; 
he  can  cure  it  all  the  more  readily  because  he  has  hit 
upon  its  cause.  Socialism  does  the  same  for  society. 
It  points  out  the  class-struggle  already  th^re,  and 
can  cure  it  all  the  more  readily  because  it  has  hit  upon 
the  cause. 

That  Socialism  Would  Destroy  Incentive.  This 
objection  is  made  on  the  assumption  that  the  present 
system  offers  an  incentive  for  economic  activity. 
But  what  is  the  nature  of  this  activity?  It  is  cer- 
tainly not  the  useful  wealth  producing  activity  of  the 
workingman,  for  all  he  receives  is  a  mere  pittance  in 
the  form  of  wages.  Capitalism  does  offer  an  incen- 
tive, but  it  is  not  for  useful  work.    It  is  for  the  useless 


108  ABC  OF  SOCIALISM 

work  of  the  money  lenders,  brokers,  railroad  mag- 
nates, etc.,  or  for  the  non-workers  who  own  stocks 
and  bonds.  The  pittance  that  is  paid  for  useful 
work  is  so  small  that  instead  of  being  an  incentive  for 
work  it  is  the  very  opposite.  Consequently  almost 
all  people  seek  to  avoid  useful  work  under  capitalism, 
knowing  that  certain  useless  activities  pay  more. 

To-day  the  worker  "  makes  a  living  "  by  giving  up 
the  best  portion  of  his  life  in  producing  useful  things. 
Instead  of  giving  him  a  mere  living,  Socialism  pro- 
poses to  give  him  the  full  social  value  of  his  labor 
rather  than  merely  a  portion  of  it.  Yet  our  critics 
say  that  Socialism  offers  no  incentive.  That  is,  if  a 
ditch  digger  gets  $1.75  per  day  for  his  work,  that  is 
an  incentive,  say  our  critics;  but  if  Socialism  offers 
him  $4.00  for  the  same  work,  that  is  lack  of  incentive. 
This  merely  shows  the  class  viewpoint  of  our  critics. 

Socialists  are  proud  that  Socialism  will  destroy 
the  kind  of  incentive  capitalism  offers.  Capitalism's 
incentive  has  prostituted  art  and  science.  The 
modem  "  artist "  is  busy  designing  advertising  dis- 
plays, while  the  modern  "  scientist "  is  busy  adulter- 
ating foods  and  other  goods.  Such  are  the  results 
of  capitalism's  incentive. 

By  substituting  an  incentive  for  useful  work  in 
place  of  profit  making  activity,  society  and  its  mem- 
bers will  be  the  gainers.  With  all  people  assured  a 
better  livelihood  than  can  be  obtained  to-day,  the 
artist  and  scientist  will  have  the  opportunity  to 
expand  their  useful  powers  which  to-day  are  crushed 
by  commercialism.  Capitalist  incentive  is  only  for 
those  living  on  the  backs  of  others ;  Socialism  incen- 
tive is  for  all,  not  for  a  few.  To-day  the  worker 
must  work  or  soon  die ;  that  is  compulsion,  not  incen- 
tive.    Under  Socialism  the  worker  will  get  the  full 


ACADEMIC  OBJECTIONS  109 

social  value  of  his  labor.  That  is,  a  real  incentive  for 
life  will  then  be  just  what  the  worker  makes  it. 

That  Socialism  Means  Mob  Rule.  This  criticism 
is  in  itself  an  admission  of  the  class  character  of 
modem  government.  So  accustomed  are  the  ruling 
class  to  having  their  own  way  that  they  characterize 
the  carrying  out  of  popular  demands  as  mob  rule. 
Socialism  intends  that  the  majority  of  all  the  people 
shall  rule ;  there  will  be  no  superior  (?)  political  class. 
This  is  but  pure  democracy.  Of  course,  this  is  re- 
pugnant to  our  self-elected  superiors,  and  hence  they 
style  true  democracy  as  mob  rule.  Socialism  offers, 
for  the  first  time,  a  government  of  the  people,  for  the 
people,  and  by  the  people.  Those  who  object  to  this 
kind  of  government  must  object  to  Socialism. 

That  Socialism  Means  Class  Government.  This 
objection  is  made  with  the  best  of  intentions.  Will 
not  Socialism  be  a  class  government  where  the  work- 
ing class  will  rule  over  other  classes  ?  Is  it  true  that 
the  object  of  the  Socialist  Party  is  to  obtain  the 
possession  of  the  government  by  the  working  class, 
but  the  establishing  of  Socialism  means  the  abolition 
of  the  profit  system.  Consequently,  all  classes,  in- 
cluding the  working  class,  will  cease  to  exist  as 
classes.  Hence  a  new  phase  in  government  will  ap- 
pear. Heretofore,  all  class  struggles  were  for  the 
purpose  of  empowering  one  class  at  the  expense  of 
others.  Since  socialism  arises  from  the  struggle  of 
the  lowest  social  class,  once  that  class  attains  power 
there  can  be  no  lower  classes  to  dominate,  and  hence 
all  social  classes  will  be  abolished. 

Tliat  Socialism  Means  a  Government  of  Office 
Holders.  On  the  surface,  this  objection  to  Socialism 
would  appear  to  be  warranted.  We  know  that  to- 
day every  increase  in  government  activity  means  an 


110  ABC  OF  SOCIALISM 

increase  in  the  number  of  office  holders.  Does  not 
SociaHsm  imply,  then,  a  vast  army  of  non-productive 
government  officials? 

Without  a  knowledge  of  Economic  Determinism 
this  objection  would  be  difficult  to  answer;  with  such 
a  knowledge  the  objection  falls.  All  government  is 
based  on  the  economic  conditions  surrounding  it  and 
cannot  exist  unless  it  fits  these  conditions.  Modern 
government  is  essentially  a  class  government  and 
numerous  officials  are  necessary  to  maintain  the  com- 
plex relations  between  modern  government  and  the 
ruling  class.  As  the  scope  of  government  increases 
the  complexity  of  these  relations  increases,  and  hence 
more  officials  are  needed.  Since  Socialism  consti- 
tutes a  change  in  the  relationship  between  the  people 
and  the  means  of  production,  a  change  in  the  nature 
of  government  must  take  place.  Socialism  will  con- 
stitute a  government  of  industry  where  the  affairs  of 
each  industry  will  be  settled  by  the  workers  in  that 
industry.  The  various  property  relations  now  exist- 
ing among  owners  of  industries  will  have  been  wiped 
out,  and  consequently  all  government  offices  regulat- 
ing such  relations  will  have  been  abolished.  There 
will  be  a  central  government,  but  its  activities  will 
deal  with  the  correlating  of  the  various  industries, 
the  same  as  a  central  labor  union  acts  towards  the 
individual  labor  unions  in  a  locality.  Socialism  then 
will  not  require  the  vast  army  of  officials  which  mere 
government  ownership  would  necessitate. 

That  Socialism  Will  Encourage  Graft.  An  ex- 
amination of  the  nature  of  graft  will  reveal  the  folly 
of  this  objection.  Graft  is  purely  capitalistic  in 
origin ;  it  comes  from  the  desires  of  private  industrial 
establishments  to  obtain  special  privileges.  In  order 
to  gain  such  privileges  government  officials  are  liber^ 


ACADEMIC  OBJECTIONS  111 

ally  rewarded  for  what  aid  they  may  render.  Graft, 
is  then  a  result  of  the  private  ownership  of  public 
necessities,  and  with  the  replacement  of  private  owner- 
ship of  industry  by  public  or  social  ownership,  graft 
will  be  automatically  abolished. 

We  have  now  considered  enough  objections,  of  both 
popular  and  academic  character,  to  demonstrate  the 
ability  of  Socialism  to  withstand  them  all.  We  have 
shown  that  in  many  cases  Capitalism  has  already  done 
what  it  pretends  to  fear  Socialism  will  do.  We  have 
attempted  to  be  strictly  logical;  we  have  appealed 
only  to  facts  and  common  sense,  not  to  prejudice  or 
enthusiasm.     The  case  now  rests  with  the  reader. 

In  closing  the  first  part  of  this  little  book  we  do  so 
with  the  hope  that  it  will  bring  light  to  more  than  one 
perplexed  worker.  The  intelligent  reader,  by  this 
time,  has  a  fairly  adequate  knowledge  of  the  modem 
practical  and  theoretical  socialism.  He  is  ready  to 
read  the  more  advanced  works  on  the  subject  and  pro- 
ceed to  the  specialized  branches  which  open  up  on 
every  hand.  But  should  he  not  care  to  do  so,  he 
knows  enough  to  make  his  socialism  intelligent  and 
sufficient  to  form  the  basis  of  a  vote  backed  by  reason 
and  judgment. 


PART  TWO 
THE  A  B  C  OF  ECONOMICS 


THE  A  B  C  OF  ECONOMICS 

The  Labor  Theory  of  Value  —  Value  of  Labor  —  Surplus 
Value  —  Price  —  Profit,  Interest,  Rent — Capital  —  Price  of 
Labor-Power 

(Note.    Everything  dealt  with  in  this  chapter,  unlets 
otherwise  stated,  assumes  the  presence  of  com- 
petition and  the  absence  of  monopolies.) 

WE  realize  that  commodities  exchange  with 
each  other  at  any  given  time  in  certain  pro- 
portions. This  exchange  is  generally  ac- 
complished through  the  medium  of  money.  Thus  let 
us  say  that  A  has  an  overcoat  which  he  sells  to  B  for 
a  specified  sum  of  money.  With  this  sum,  let  us  supn 
pose  that  A  buys  two  pairs  of  shoes  from  a  third 
party,  whom  we  shall  call  C.  What  A  has  really 
done  is  to  exchange  his  overcoat  for  two  pairs  of 
shoes,  or,  in  other  words,  the  value  of  the  coat  is 
equal  to  twice  the  value  of  a  pair  of  shoes.  Value, 
then,  is  the  proportional  quantity  for  which  one  com- 
modity is  exchanged  with  other  commodities. 

We  can  thus  set  down  varying  quantities  of  differ- 
ent commodities  whose  values  are  equivalent.  What 
determines  this  value.''  Before  answering  this  ques- 
tion a  few  examples  will  better  prepare  us  to  appre- 
ciate what  follows.  Scientists  tell  us  that  one  mile 
equals  1.61  kilometers  (the  French  standard  of  dis- 
tance-measurement). How  do  they  determine  this.? 
They  take  a  fixed  distance  and  apply  it  to  both  of  the 
above  distances,  and  find  that  if  this  fixed  distance 
goes  161  times  into  a  kilometer  it  goes  100  times  into 

a  mile.     The  ratio  1.61  is  thus  established.     But  in 

115 


116  A  B  C  OF  ECONOMICS 

order  to  get  this  ratio  they  must  employ  a  measure 
which  is  common  to  both  distances.  In  this  case  a 
fixed  distance  (one  one-hundredth  of  a  mile)  is  the 
measure. 

Or  again,  we  are  told  that  a  cubic  foot  of  mercury 
has  a  weight  equal  to  that  of  13.6  cubic  feet  of  water. 
Now  it  is  evident  that  mercury  and  water  are  two 
different  substances.  We  could  not  write  an  expres- 
sion of  equality  between  them  unless  there  was  some- 
thing in  common  between  them,  by  which  a  common 
relation  could  be  expressed.  Well,  both  substances 
are  liquids,  but  we  know  from  experience  that  such  a 
property  does  not  affect  the  weight  relationship. 
The  proper  relationship  can  be  determined  by  the  use 
of  a  proper  unit,  say  a  one-pound  weight.  By  ap- 
plying this  unit  we  find  that  a  cubic  foot  of  water 
weighs  62.4  pounds,  while  a  cubic  foot  of  mercury 
weighs  84«9  pounds.  Dividing  both  quantities  by 
62.4  we  get  the  ratio  1  to  13.6. 

The  value  of  commodities  is  similarly  determined, 
by  the  application  of  the  proper  unit  of  measure. 
Experience  shows  us  that  the  amount  of  socially 
necessary  labor  power  contained  in  a  commodity  de- 
termines its  value.  Thus,  before  the  invention  of  the 
cotton  gin,  a  large  amount  of  labor  was  required  to 
remove  the  seeds  from  the  fiber.  The  value  of 
cleaned  cotton,  therefore,  was  comparatively  high. 
The  invention  of  the  cotton  gin,  however,  greatly 
reduced  the  amount  of  labor  necessary  to  clean  cot- 
ton, and  as  a  result,  the  value  of  clean  cotton  fell 
considerably. 

What  applies  to  cotton  applies  to  all  other  com- 
modities. It  is  a  fact  that  improved  methods  of  pro- 
duction which  resulted  in  a  saving  of  labor  were 
followed  by  a  reduction  in  the  price  of  the  commodity 


THEORIES  OF  VALUE  117 

thus  produced.  This  is  vividly  illustrated  by  the 
history  of  the  price  of  shoes,  steel  ware,  and  other 
goods.  The  best  recent  illustration  of  this  is  found 
in  the  production  of  crude  rubber.  Not  more  than 
several  years  ago  this  commodity  was  collected  in 
vast  forests  by  methods  requiring  great  outputs  of 
labor.  To-day  rubber  trees  are  artificially  culti- 
vated, and  the  gathering  and  treatment  of  the  pro- 
duct has  been  systematized,  resulting  in  a  considera- 
ble saving  of  labor.  This  saving  of  labor,  in  turn,  re- 
sulted in  a  60%  reduction  in  the  price  of  crude  rub- 
ber. On  the  other  hand,  there  are  cases  where  more 
labor  than  formerly  has  been  required  to  produce 
certain  commodities ;  in  such  cases,  prices  have  risen. 

The  value  of  a  commodity,  then,  is  determined  by 
the  socially  necessary  labor  power  contained  therein. 
The  expression  "  socially  necessary  "  is  of  extreme 
importance.  Thus,  after  the  invention  of  the  cotton 
gin,  the  value  of  all  cotton  fell.  Cotton  cleaned  by 
the  hand  was  just  as  cheap  as  cotton  cleaned  by  the 
machine,  although  the  former  had  consumed  more 
labor.  In  spite  of  this  consumption  of  extra  labor 
the  cotton  was  not  more  valuable  because  the  extra 
labor  contained  therein  was  Twt  socially  necessary. 
Accordingly,  waste  labor,  or  useless  labor,  creates  no 
value,  since  it  is  not  socially  necessary.  Another 
way  of  expressing  the  same  idea  is  to  say  that  the 
value  of  a  commodity  is  determined  by  the  labor 
power  socially  necessary  to  reproduce  the  commodity. 

Modern  economists  disagree  amongst  themselves 
as  to  what  determines  value.  Some  say  that  scarcity 
is  the  cause ;  others  advance  the  utility  (marginal 
utility)  theory,  and  still  others  support  the  theory 
of  supply  and  demand.  Let  us  consider  these 
theories. 


118  ABC  OF  ECONOMICS 

The  Scarcity  Theory  states  that  value  is  deter- 
mined by  the  scarcity  of  a  commodity.  The  more 
scarce  it  is,  the  greater  its  value,  is  the  idea.  The 
Marginal  Utility  Theory  ^  states  that  value  depends 
upon  the  satisfaction  derived  from  the  consumption 
of  goods.  Neither  of  these  theories  is  sound  enough 
to  withstand  analysis. 

The  value  of  goods  is  social  and  artificial  in  charac- 
ter, and  is  due  to  artificial  relations  of  the  exchange 
of  commodities.  The  basis  of  value  must  then  be 
social.  Scarcity,  however,  is  a  natural  property  and 
is  independent  of  artificial  relationship.  It  there- 
fore cannot  be  a  fit  measure  of  value.  In  fact,  some 
of  the  most  abundant  substances  are  more  expensive 
than  scarcer  ones.  For  instance,  aluminium  consti- 
tutes from  6  to  10  per  cent,  of  the  earth's  crust, 
whereas  carbon  constitutes  about  1  per  cent.  Now, 
although  coal  makes  up  but  a  fraction  of  all  the  car- 

1  The  theory  of  marginal  utility  as  the  cause  of  value  is  based 
on  the  law  of  diminishing  utility.  This  law  states  that  succes- 
sive consumption  of  a  given  article  yields  less  and  less  satisfac- 
tion. The  satisfaction  derived  is  called  utility.  Utility,  we 
are  told,  can  be  measured  by  what  people  are  willing  to  give  for 
it. 

Then  the  conservative  economists  reason  as  follows:  Suppose 
a  number  of  apples  were  offered  to  us,  in  successiwi.  If  the 
first  were  the  only  apple  available,  its  fragrance  and  taste 
would  so  appeal  to  us  that  we  would  be  willing  to  give,  say  a 
dollar  for  it.  A  second  apple  would  yield  satisfaction,  but  not 
so  much  as  the  first,  hence  we  would  be  willing  to  give  only 
80  cents  for  it.  And  so  on  with  the  others.  If  now,  these 
apples  exist  as  a  stock,  all  will  have  the  same  price,  which  will 
be  the  utility  afforded  by  the  last  apple.  This  smallest  utility 
is  called  marginal  utility. 

The  above  sophistry  is  called  a  "psychological  analysis  of 
consumption."  A  more  truthful  estimate  of  this  theory  is  that 
it  is  a  conventional  and  unwarranted  assumption  expressed  in 
technical  language.  It  is  not  in  accord  with  experience  and  the 
reason  why  it  cannot  be  a  cause  of  value  is  given  in  the  text 
above. 


THEORIES  OF  VALUE  119 

bon,  nevertheless  coal  is  very  much  cheaper  than  alu- 
minium. Again,  oxygen  is  the  most  abundant  element 
on  earth,  and  yet  it  is  much  more  expensive  than  many 
substances  which,  when  compared  to  it  are  not  only 
scarce,  but  rare.  The  reason,  in  both  these  cases, 
is  that  it  requires  more  labor  to  extract  aluminium 
than  coal  on  the  one  hand,  and  on  the  other,  it  re- 
quires much  more  labor  to  obtain  oxygen  than 
sulphur,  salt,  iron,  and  so  on. 

The  marginal  utility  theory  also  falls  to  the  ground 
in  that  the  consumption  of  commodities  (on  which  it 
is  based)  is  an  individual  and  not  a  social  affair.  It 
cannot,  therefore,  explain  a  social  relationship.  In 
addition,  experience  shows  that  the  value  is  entirely 
independent  of  utility  except  that  no  article  can  have 
value  unless  it  possesses  utility,  real  or  imaginary. 
This  qualification  is  accepted  as  essential  in  all 
theories  of  value. 

The  Theory  of  Supply  and  Demand  appears  on  the 
surface  to  be  more  scientific.  It  is  based  on  the 
observation  that  market  prices  rise  with  decreased 
supply  or  increased  demand,  and  fall  with  increased 
supply  or  decreased  demand.  In  the  first  place, 
Marxian  economics  draws  a  sharp  distinction  between 
value  and  price  (see  Price  further  on),  and  secondly, 
supply-and-demand  does  not  even  offer  a  satisfactory 
explanation  of  price.  We  are  told  by  the  intelligent 
supporters  of  this  theory  that  retail  prices  do  not 
follow  the  market  fluctuations,  and  that  supply-and- 
demand  applies  rather  to  wholesale  prices.  But 
goods  sold  at  wholesale  are  in  the  process  of  distribu- 
tion and  are  not  being  exchanged,  hence  supply  and 
demand  do  not  affect  values,  but  merely  the  prices  in 
process  of  distribution. 

Now  let  us  assume,  for  instance,  that  the  supply 


120  A  B  C  OF  ECONOMICS 

equals  the  demand.  Then  the  tendency  to  raise 
values  is  equally  offset  by  the  tendency  to  lower 
prices;  accordingly,  our  commodity  should  have  no 
value  at  all  if  the  supply-and-demand  theory  holds 
true.  When  such  a  case  occurs,  however  (and  in  the 
long  run  it  occurs  with  all  commodities),  we  find  a 
very  definite  value  stated ;  this  is  indeed  the  standard 
market  price. 

The  truth  of  the  matter  is  that  market  variations 
due  to  supply  and  demand  offer  no  data  from  which 
conclusions  as  to  value  may  be  drawn.  We  observe 
that  such  variations  cause  fluctuations  in  price  and 
hence  the  only  logical  conclusion  that  can  be  drawn 
is  that  supply  and  demand  cause  price-fluctuations. 
Price  fluctuations,  however,  are  a  very  different  thing 
from  price  and  value.^ 

In  contrast  with  the  above,  the  labor  theory  of 
value  deals  with  goods  in  the  process  of  exchange, 
and  not  in  distribution.  It  deals,  in  other  words, 
with  value,  and  not  with  its  fluctuations.  Again, 
it  is  more  scientific  than  the  other  theories  in  that  it 
gives  a  suitable  unit  by  which  value  may  be  measured. 
Every  quantitative  expression  involves  the  use  of 
such  a  unit.^ 

The  Value  of  Labor.     How  is  the  value  of  labor 

2  It  is  as  ridiculous  to  say  that  supply  and  demand  are  a 
coAise  of  value  as  it  is  to  say  that  the  depth  of  the  ocean  is 
determined  by  the  height  of  the  waves.  The  height  of  the 
waves  merely  cause  a  fluctuation  of  the  depth,  and  supply  and 
demand  merely  cause  a  fluctuation  in  price. 

3  The  labor  theory  of  value  is  not  original  with  Karl  Marx; 
it  was  taken  over  by  him  bodily  from  the  classical  economists 
and  was  generally  accepted  in  his  day  as  the  cause  of  value. 
It  was  after  Marx  had  developed  his  idea  of  surplus  value 
from  the  labor  theory  of  value  that  new  theories  became  prom- 
inent. The  idea  of  surplus  value,  a  logical  conclusion  from  the 
labor  theory  of  value,  was  too  revolutionary  to  be  taught ! 


LABOR  AND  COMMODITY  121 

power  to  be  determined?  By  the  identical  method 
with  which  the  value  of  other  commodities  is  deter- 
mined; namely,  the  quantity  of  labor  socially  neces- 
sary to  produce  (reproduce)  it.  In  order  to  produce 
the  labor-power,  which  is  inseparable  from  the  indi- 
vidual laborer,  not  only  must  the  toiler  be  fed  and 
sheltered,  but  when  he  is  worn  out  (unable  to  work) 
there  must  be  another  to  replace  him.  In  other 
words,  the  value  of  an  individual's  labor  power  is  de- 
termined by  the  value  of  the  necessaries  required  to 
produce,  develop,  maintain  and  perpetuate  his  kind. 
This  does  not  mean  that  the  value  of  labor  is  that 
which  will  allow  a  bare  existence.  The  standard  of 
living  is  social,  and  the  value  of  labor  is  measured  by 
the  necessities  required  to  enable  the  laborer  to  live 
up  to  this  traditional  standard.* 

This  does  not  mean  that  the  value  of  all  labor  is 
equal.  Since  it  requires  much  more  economic  effort 
to  produce  and  maintain  an  engineer  than  to  produce 
and  maintain  an  unskilled  worker,  the  value  of  the 
engineer's  labor  power  is  higher  than  that  of  the 
unskilled  worker.  This  difference  in  value  is  re- 
flected in  the  higher  wages  which  the  engineer  re- 
ceives. 

Surplus  Valu^.  The  value  of  labor  power,  then,  is 
independent  of  what  it  produces.  If  a  worker  can 
produce  enough  in  five  hours  to  maintain  himself,  his 
wages  will  correspond  to  a  value  measured  by  his  five 
hours'  labor.  If,  however,  he  does  not  stop  at  the 
end  of  that  five  hours,  but  continues  another  five 
hours  (working  ten  hours  in  all),  he  produces  a  sur- 

4  Before  leaving  this  topic  it  must  be  recalled  that  the  labor 
theory  of  value  deals  only  with  such  goods  as  are  readily  pro- 
duced. It  does  not  deal  with  such  things  as  rare  works  of  art, 
historic  treasures,  etc. 


122  ABC  OF  ECONOMICS 

plus  value,  measured  by  the  extra  five  hours'  work 
for  which  he  is  not  paid.  Surplus  value,  then,  is 
vmpaid  labor.  This  surplus  forms  the  fund  from 
which  profit,  rent,  interest  and  socially  unnecessary 
labor  receive  their  revenue. 

If  real  wages  increase,  then  this  surplus  decreases ; 
when  real  wages  decrease,  then  this  surplus  increases. 
A  distinction  must  here  be  made  between  nominal 
wages  and  real  wages.  Nominal  wages  consists  of 
the  actual  money  a  worker  gets  for  his  labor;  real 
wages  consists  of  that  which  the  worker  can  actually 
get  for  the  money  he  receives.  Thus  it  is  possible, 
and  frequently  happens,  that  in  spite  of  a  rise  in 
nominal  wages,  real  wages  are  lowered  and  surplus 
value  is  increased. 

For  instance,  the  worker  gets  a  raise  of  10%  in 
wages.  But  the  cost  of  living  goes  up  20%.  The 
nominal  wages  of  the  worker  have  increased:  that  is, 
he  is  actually  receiving  more  money ;  but,  due  to  the 
rise  in  the  cost  of  living,  the  purchasing  power  of  his 
money  has  been  so  weakened  as  to  constitute  really  a 
step  backward.  In  other  words,  his  real  wages  have 
gone  down. 

The  secret  of  profit,  rent  and  interest  lie  in  surplus 
value.  This  surplus  value  can  be  obtained  only  when 
the  laborer  produces  more  than  he  consumes.  This 
is  the  significance  of  the  wage-system.  When  So- 
cialists denounce  the  wage  system,  they  do  not  de- 
nounce the  system  wherein  labor  is  rewarded  in 
money-payments ;  they  denounce  the  system  wherein 
labor  is  paid  only  a  part  of  the  value  it  produces. 
Sometimes  this  sentiment  is  expressed  as  a  demand 
"  for  the  full  product  of  labor."  As  already  stated, 
this  means,  not  the  actual  ownership  of  the  things 
created  by  labor,  but  a  reward  equal  to  the  value 


LABOR  AND  COMMODITY  123 

added  to  the  commodity  by  the  labor  performed. 

Price.  The  price  of  a  commodity  is  the  selling 
price  of  that  good  expressed  in  money.  If  goods 
exchanged  at  their  value,  the  price  of  a  commodity 
would  be  the  value  of  that  commodity  expressed  in 
gold,  which  is  the  basis  of  money.  But  prices,  as  a 
general  rule,  do  not  express  the  value  of  commodities ; 
usually,  for  any  given  commodity,  the  average  price 
is  above  or  below  its  value  (as  expressed  in  gold). 
If  this  is  the  case,  it  becomes  evident  that  a  study  of 
prices  is  not  necessarily  a  study  of  values.  This  is 
an  error  which  modern  economists  make;  hence  their 
misunderstanding  of  the  labor  theory  of  value  on  the 
one  hand,  and  their  numerous  faulty  theories  of  value 
on  the  other.  The  question  then  arises,  why  do  not 
goods  sell  at  their  values? 

Capitalism  has  developed  an  economic  law  of  its 
own.  This  is,  namely,  that  the  rates  of  profit  in 
the  various  industries  tend  to  be  equal.  This  is  a 
result  of  competition,  and  consequently  prices  are 
affected  by  this  competition  so  as  to  yield  this  rate 
of  profit.  Accordingly  goods  are  sold  practically 
always  above  the  cost  of  production.  The  price  at 
which  the  goods  are  sold,  however,  is  generally  above 
or  below  its  value.  Value  and  price  do  coincide  only 
when  the  sum  total  prices  of  all  commodities  are  com- 
pared with  their  sum  total  values.  Under  Capital- 
ism, the  law  of  value  becomes  only  a  tendency  when 
applied  to  any  one  price.  The  operation  of  this  is 
readily  observed  when  changes  in  the  productivity  of 
labor  takes  place.  When  no  such  changes  take  place 
the  law  of  value  is  still  operating;  it  is,  however, 
obscured  by  the  results  of  competition,  which  give  the 
appearance  of  causes  to  superficial  effects. 

We  know  that  prices  of  the  same  commodity  vary 


1^4i  ABC  OF  ECONOMICS 

in  its  different  stages  of  distribution.  The  manufac- 
turer sells  his  goods  to  a  wholesale  merchant,  who  sells 
it  at  a  higher  price  to  a  retail  merchant,  who  in  turn 
sells  it  at  a  still  higher  price  to  the  people.  Here, 
for  the  first  time,  the  commodity  is  exchanged  for  the 
value  of  the  workers'  labor  power  in  it  on  the  one 
hand,  and  the  surplus  value  of  others.  In  practice 
the  process  of  distribution  may  be  more  complex,  and 
consequently  the  commodity  commands  a  great  vari- 
ety of  prices  in  the  course  of  distribution.  Those 
who  maintain  that  prices  directly  represent  value 
(and  this  covers  all  who  do  not  accept  the  labor 
theory  of  value)  are  confronted  with  the  following 
questions : 

Which  of  the  aforementioned  various  prices  of  the 
same  commodity  corresponds  to  the  value  of  the  com- 
modity ? 

Why  has  the  same  commodity  different  "  values," 
since  the  supply,  demand,  scarcity  and  marginal 
utility  are  the  same  whether  it  is  sold  wholesale  or 
retail  ?  If  the  mere  process  of  distribution  creates 
"value,"  what  is  the  need  of  working;  why  cannot 
everybody  grow  rich  by  merely  distributing  goods 
and  live  on  the  increased  "  value  "  thus  created.'* 

A  satisfactory  explanation  of  price  must  show  how 
the  same  commodity  with  its  fixed  value  can  have  the 
various  prices  indicated  above.  Karl  Marx  gives 
such  an  explanation  in  "  Capital,"  Vol.  Ill,  and  at 
the  same  time  shows  that  this  law  of  price  is  a  result 
of  the  law  of  value,  modified,  however,  by  competition. 
The  law  of  value,  thus  modified,  applies  to  the 
exchange  relation  of  commodities;  this  exchange, 
however,  does  not  take  place  until  the  commodities 
have  been  sold  to  the  ultimate  consumer.  Hence  the 
law  of  value,  modified  by  competition,  applies  to  goods 


LABOR  AND  COMMODITY  126 

sold  at  retail. 

When  the  capitalist  system  is  working  we  know 
that  goods  are  sold  for  more  than  what  was  paid  for 
them ;  this  is  the  essence  of  all  business.  Then  again, 
since  competition  creates  the  tendency  for  profits  to 
become  equal  in  all  branches  of  industry,  we  can  lay 
down  the  following  law  of  price.  The  price  of  a 
commodity  is  equal  to  the  socially  necessary  cost  of 
production  plus  the  average  rate  of  profit.^  Thus  a 
commodity  produced  in  factories  is  practically  al- 
ways sold  at  such  a  price  as  to  yield  approximately 
the  average  rate  of  profit.  The  wholesaler  who  buys 
it  sells  it  at  a  still  higher  price  to  the  retailer,  who, 
in  turn,  sells  it  for  a  still  higher  price  to  the  con- 
sumer. 

Retail  prices  are  the  most  stationary  and  are  com- 
paratively unaffected  by  the  daily  fluctuations  of  the 
wholesale  market.  This  itself  shows  first,  the  super- 
ficial character  of  supply  and  demand  and  second, 
the  working  of  our  labor  law  of  value.  In  case  of 
war,  etc.,  it  becomes  more  difficult  to  produce  certain 
commodities.  Then  retail  prices  go  up  from  de- 
creased supply,  hut  also  because  more  labor  is  re- 
quired to  produce  the  commodity  than  was  previously 
necessary.  The  decreased  supply  is,  then,  merely  a 
symptom  of  the  true  cause  of  the  higher  price.  Thus 
in  what  are  sometimes  called  good  years  a  given  num- 

5  If  price  were  determined  by  supply  and  demand,  or  mar- 
ginal utility  we  should  expect  that  the  price  of  a  commodity 
would  be  as  frequently  below  the  cost  of  production  as  it  is 
above  it.  If  this  were  so  then  the  net  profits  obtained  by  the 
capitalist  class  as  a  whole  would  amount  to  nothing.  We  know 
that  such  is  not  the  case.  On  the  contrary,  cost  of  production 
is  to  a  great  extent  the  cause  of  supply  and  demand.  When 
the  cost  of  production  is  low  a  given  investment  yields  a  com- 
paratively large  supply;  when  cost  of  production  is  high  a  d© 
crease  in  output  results. 


1^6  ABC  OF  ECONOMICS 

ber  of  men  can  gather  a  large  crop ;  if,  however,  the 
year  is  poor  then  the  same  number  of  men  can  gather 
only  a  smaller  amount.  In  other  words  more  labor 
is  required  for  each  bushel  of  wheat,  oats,  etc.,  and 
consequently  retail  prices  rise  m  bad  years. 

The  law  of  value  is  then  a  statement  of  the  pre- 
vailing tendency  which  governs  the  exchange  of  goods 
under  capitalism ;  it  is  not  a  statement  of  how  things 
ought  to  exchange,  or  how  they  will  exchange  under 
Socialism.  Competition  introduces  the  tendency  for 
profits  to  equalize  and  accordingly  the  law  of  value 
is  not  directly  applicable  to  price.  Market  price  de- 
pends essentially  upon  the  average  cost  of  produc- 
tion plus  the  average  rate  of  profit.  Supply  and 
demand  cause  a  fluctuation  of  this  price  but  in  the 
long  run  the  upward  fluctuations  neutralize  the  down- 
ward ones. 

Most  capitalistic  professors  of  economics  recog- 
nize that  the  cost  of  production  is  practically  always 
below  the  selling  price.  Hence  they  say  that  value 
determines  the  cost  of  production.  In  a  sense  this 
is  true,  in  that  the  value  of  a  commodity  is  deter- 
mined by  the  necessary  labor  power  embodied  in  a 
commodity,  and  this  labor  power  always  receives  less 
than  the  value  it  has  created.  Otherwise  there  could 
be  no  profit.  But  this  is  merely  another  way  of 
stating  the  doctrine  of  surplus  value,  which  the  same 
professors  so  strenuously  deny. 

Profit,  Interest y  Rent.  From  what  we  have  already 
considered,  it  is  seen  that  profit  is  only  a  part  of 
surplus-value,  for  what  forms  one  man's  profit  be- 
comes another's  expense.  Commercially,  profit  is 
the  difference  between  selling  prices  and  cost  prices, 
the  latter  including  all  expenses.  The  basis  of  profit 
is  surplus  value,  which  results  from  the  paying  of 


PROFIT,  INTEREST,  RENT  127 

men  for  the  use  of  their  labor  power  and  not  for  what 
is  produced. 

If  our  industrial  capitalist  has  borrowed  money 
from  a  financial  source  (private  capitalist  or  bank) 
he  must  pay  interest  upon  it.  To  him  this  is  an 
expense,  and  since  it  reduces  the  surplus  value  avail- 
able for  himself,  it  also  reduces  profits.  To  the 
money  lender  who  receives  the  interest  as  well  as  the 
original  loan,  it  is  a  clear  gain.  This  interest  can 
buy  some  of  the  goods  produced  by  the  employees  of 
the  industrial  capitalist.  It  is  hence  a  portion  of 
the  product  which  they  cannot  buy  back  and  there- 
fore is  a  part  of  surplus  value,  though  a  source  of 
expense  to  the  industrial  capitalist. 

Rent.  The  word  rent  (or  ground  rent)  as  used  in 
economics  means  the  payment  made  for  the  use  of 
land  and  other  natural  resources.  Land  as  such 
asks  for  no  payment,  but  since  it  is  privately  owned 
and  its  occupation  is  essential  for  economic  activity 
a  toll  is  extracted  by  the  owner  in  the  form  of  rent. 
This,  too,  represents  unpaid  labor  and  is,  hence,  a 
portion  of  surplus  value  though  not  of  profit.  Such 
rent  has  interesting  laws  of  its  own.  (See  "  Capi- 
tal," Vol.  III.) 

Common  rent,  that  is,  house  or  building  rent,  is 
more  complex  in  character.  It  is  a  mixture  of  neces- 
sary and  unnecessary  payments.  Among  the  former 
are  maintenance,  depreciation,  and  taxes ;  among 
the  latter  are  ground  rent  and  interest  on  invested 
capital.  In  the  payment  of  ground  rent  the  pay- 
ment represents  exploitation  of  the  producer,  while 
part  of  payment  of  house  rent  (the  unnecessary 
part)  represents  exploitation  of  the  consumer. 

In  the  past,  a  number  of  Socialist  writers  con- 
sidered that  the  taxes  were  paid  by  the  receivers  of 


1^  A  B  C  OF  ECONOMICS 

surplus  value  and  hence  did  not  affect  the  working 
class.  But  as  a  little  thinking  will  show,  such  taxes 
are  ''  socially  necessary "  expenses  of  production, 
and  hence  are  paid  by  the  ultimate  consumer.  This 
fact  has  been  recognized  by  the  Socialist  parties  of 
several  nations  and  hence  their  platforms  call  for  the 
substitution  of  direct  taxes  in  place  of  indirect  ones. 
Indirect  taxes  are  paid  by  the  consumer,  since  such 
taxes  can  be  shifted,  whereas  direct  taxes  (like  the 
inheritance  and  income  taxes)  cannot  be  shifted  as  a 
general  rule.^ 

Capital.  To  the  average  person  this  word  means 
the  investment  on  which  an  industry  is  run.  In  most 
of  our  colleges  a  different  meaning  is  put  on  the  word. 
In  those  institutions  capital  is  defined  as  "  wealth 
used  in  the  production  of  wealth."  Under  this  defi- 
nition a  carpenter's  saw  is  capital  as  is  also  a  factory 
building;  a  painter's  brush  is  considered  capital  as 
well  as  the  ship  he  is  painting. 

Socialists  have  a  well  founded  objection  to  this 
definition  on  the  ground  that  it  is  too  inclusive  and 
thereby  leads  to  a  lack  of  clearness.  Thus,  in  the 
above  example,  the  carpenter's  saw  is  his  own  prop- 
erty and  is  used  only  when  he  himself  is  working ;  and 
so  with  the  painter  and  his  brush.  The  owners  of 
these  tools  get  their  living  by  using  these  tools  them- 
selves. This  is  not  the  case  with  the  factory-build- 
ing or  ship;  in  this  case  the  people  using  either  do 
not  own  them.  Nor  do  the  owners  have  to  work  in 
them  in  order  to  get  their  profits.  They  get  their 
incomes  from  the  mere  ownership  of  the  factory  or 
ship.  Hence  the  great  difference  between  the  saw 
and  the  brush  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  building  and 

6  The  tax  on  land  values  is  also  a  direct  tax  and  will  be  used 
by  the  workers  to  help  shift  some  of  the  burden  of  taxation. 


ASPECTS  OF  CAPITAL  129 

ship  on  the  other.  But  they  are  all  "  wealth  used  for 
the  production  of  wealth  "  and  hence  Socialists  call 
them  "  the  tools  or  means  of  production."  The  ship 
and  building  also  represent  what  Socialists  call  Capi- 
tal. Again,  the  factory  owner  may  borrow  or  lay 
aside  money  to  meet  expenses.  This,  too,  constitutes 
capital  in  the  Socialist  sense  of  the  word. 

Capital,  as  Socialists  define  it,  is  value  used  to 
exploit  labor.  By  exploiting  labor  is  meant  the 
extraction  of  surplus  value  which  is  created  but  not 
received  by  the  workers.  And  so  buildings,  machin- 
ery, raw  materials,  funds,  etc.,  constitute  capital.  On 
the  other  hand  a  man  who  uses  his  own  tools  exploits 
no  one  and  hence  his  tools  do  not  constitute  capital 
but  merely  means  of  production.  The  tools  or  means 
of  production  constitute  capital  onltf  when  they  are 
owned  hy  others  who  do  not  use  them  for  production, 
hut  make  them  the  mediu/m  of  exploitation. 

It  is  this  separation  of  ownership  which  character- 
izes modern  society  and  hence  the  present  economic 
system  is  called  the  Capitalist  System. 

Production  is  carried  on  by  the  owners  of  Capital, 
who  are  called  Capitalists,  for  the  purpose  of  making 
a  profit.  The  profit  and  other  forms  of  surplus 
value  is  taken  solely  by  virtue  of  ownership.  The 
people  cannot  work  unless  they  use  these  tools  of 
modern  industry.  The  owners  do  not  care  to  have 
these  tools  used  unless  they  can  get  "  returns."  By 
virtue  of  their  ownership  they  become  the  modem 
master-class  and  are  enabled  to  get  a  part  of  the 
surplus  value  created  by  the  labor  which  uses  these 
tools. 

And  so,  too,  the  financial  capitalist,  by  virtue  of 
his  ownership  of  money  which  the  industrial  capitalist 
must  have,  is  enabled  to  demand  and  receive  his  re- 


130  ABC  OF  ECONOMICS 

turns  which  are  a  part  of  the  surplus  value  created. 
And  what  applies  to  the  financial  capitalist  applies 
to  the  landlord. 

These  groups  of  capitalists,  while  a  source  of  ex- 
pense to  each  other,  nevertheless  receive  their  income 
from  one  source,  namely,  surplus-value,  and  hence  are 
united  when  confronted  with  labor  problems.  They 
instinctively  recognize  that  the  demands  of  labor  can 
only  be  granted  at  their  expense. 

Socialists  seek  the  abolition  of  the  Capitalist  Sys- 
tem. This  can  not  be  done  by  attacking  groups  or 
individuals ;  the  capitalist  class  is  created  hy,  and  is 
not  the  creator  of,  the  capitalist  system.  They  are 
the  beneficiaries  of  it  and  therefore  seek  to  maintain 
it,  but  that  is  only  natural.  Socialism  cannot  come 
about  without  the  abolition  of  capital.  But  this  does 
not  mean,  as  some  half  informed  professors  think, 
that  Socialists  wish  to  do  without  modem  machinery, 
buildings,  etc.  By  "  capital "  they  have  a  much 
clearer  concept  than  have  the  professors  of  economics. 
By  the  abolition  of  capital  they  mean  the  abolition  of 
the  private  ownership  of  the  tools  of  production 
which  allows  one  class  to  live  on  the  labor  of  another. 

The  excuses  offered  for  the  taking  of  ground  rent 
and  interest  are  so  feeble  that  we  will  pay  but  little 
attention  to  them.  The  truth  of  the  matter  is  that 
the  owners  of  land  and  money  capital  are  in  a  position 
to  demand  them.  The  use  of  capital  allows  the 
exploitation  of  labor  and  the  consequent  production 
of  surplus  value  created  through  the  use  of  property. 

Those  economists  who  uphold  the  present  system 
state,  as  we  have  already  seen,  that  labor,  land  and 
capital  produce  wealth."^  Therefore,  they  say  the 
wealth  produced  should  be  divided  between  laborers, 

7  Wealth  means  a  collection  of  goods  having  value. 


ASPECTS  OF  CAPITAL  131 

landlords  and  capitalists.  We  have  already  seen  the 
double  and  therefore  faulty  character  of  their  defini- 
tion of  capital.  Furthermore,  labor  cannot  be  separ- 
ated from  the  laborer.  Land  and  capital,  however, 
are  entirely  different  from  landlords  and  capitalists. 
If  land  and  capital  demand  a  share  in  the  wealth  pro- 
duced, then  we  should  pay  our  rent  and  interest  to 
land  and  capital  and  not  to  landlords  and  capitalists. 
But  this  is  absurd.  So  is  the  assertion  that  land  and 
capital  produce  wealth. 

The  products  of  land  alone  have  no  value.  Only 
when  land  is  cultivated,  that  is,  when  labor  is  applied 
to  land,  do  the  products  have  value.  This  value  is 
thus  a  product  of  labor  alone.  Mechanically  speak- 
ing, the  products  come  from  the  ground,  but  the  value 
of  that  product  is  a  social  and  not  a  natural  result, 
and  is  due  entirely  to  the  labor  expended  in  plowing, 
sowing,  weeding,  reaping,  storing,  transporting,  etc. 
If  agricultural  products  required  no  labor,  their  value 
would  be  nothing.  Thus  land  in  itself  although  it  is 
a  factor  of  production,  produces  no  value  and  hence 
no  wealth. 

The  so  called  productivity  ^  of  capital  is  in  the 
same  class  with  so  called  productivity  of  land.^  Our 
economists  confuse  the  increased  production  of  ^oods 
with  increased  value.  The  use  of  capital  in  the  form 
of  machinery  results  in  an  increase  in  output.  But 
as  we  have  seen  in  the  discussion  of  value,  the  social 
result  of  the  use  of  machinery  js  to  reduce  values  in 
proportion  to  the  decrease  in  the  total  labor  re- 
quired. This  decrease  in  value  is  reflected  in  de- 
creased prices.  Machmery  produces  no  valtie;  it  is 
a  means  of  making  labor  more  efficient,     Disregard- 

8  Productivity  relates  to  production  of  value  and  not  of 
goods. 


18«  A  B  C  OF  ECONOMICS 

ing  immediate  effects,  the  use  of  machinery  reduces 
values,  enabling  the  worker  to  reproduce  his  wages 
in  less  time.  Consequently,  there  remains  a  greater 
period  of  time  during  which  surplus  value  may  be 
produced. 

Machinery,  while  thus  not  increasing  values,  does 
increase  profits.  The  short  sighted  economist  con- 
fuses the  production  of  profits  with  the  production 
of  value  and  hence  thinks  his  theory  is  supported  by 
facts.  Capital  by  itself  is  inert;  it  produces  no 
value;  its  possession  does  enable  the  extraction  of 
values  created  by  the  working  class. 

The  apologists  for  the  present  economic  system 
use  other  arguments  attempting  to  justify  the  "  re- 
ward of  capital."  The  "  wages  of  superintendence  " 
is  another  one  of  these.  The  capitalist  class,  they 
tell  us,  is  entitled  to  its  income  because  they  manage 
or  superintend  the  industries.  When  superintend- 
ence means  the  coordination  of  various  departments 
of  production  it  is  real  work  and  is  entitled  to  wages. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  practically  all  such  managing 
is  done  by  employees  who  receive  a  salary  and  who  do 
not  receive  profits,  although  in  some  establishments  a 
portion  of  this  salary  is  paid  in  the  form  of  a  "  share 
in  the  profits."  This  "  profit  sharing "  fools  only 
those  people  who  have  not  received  such  shares. 

As  already  mentioned  a  group  of  the  capitalist 
class,  as  Directors  of  Industries,  safeguard  profits. 
Such  activities  do  not  produce  values.  The  so-called 
"  wages  of  superintendence "  falls  to  the  ground 
when  applied  to  the  capitalist  class.  It  does  apply 
partly  to  the  so-called  profits  of  the  middle  class. 
When  capitalists  do  perform  work  as  railroad  presi- 
dents, etc.,  they  receive  extra  compensation. 

When  the  problem  is  squarely  faced  there  can  be 


ASPECTS  OF  CAPITAL  1S8 

no  apologizing.  The  income  of  the  notorious  Harry 
Thaw  continued  just  the  same  whether  he  was  in  the 
insane  asylum  or  not.  Certainly  while  confined  there 
he  could  not  exercise  "  executive  ability  "  in  superin- 
tending industries ;  and  we  all  know  how  much  "  su- 
perior brains  "  he  has  to  exercise  that  superintend- 
ence. Or  again  the  helpless  Astor  infant  will  be  re- 
ceiving vast  incomes  from  its  capital.  It  certainly 
is  not  managing  industry,  yet  it  receives  its  income. 
It  is  of  little  use  to  dodge  the  issue.  Every  intelli- 
gent person  recognizes  that  under  the  present  system, 
capitalists  can  get  an  income  without  performing 
useful  work. 

The  so  called  risk  that  capitalists  take  is  another 
"  argument."  The  risks  they  take  are  risks  of  not 
making  a  profit.  Such  risks  produce  no  value  and 
hence  are  entitled  to  no  reward.  If  the  capitalist 
class  receives  vast  sums  for  trying  to, make  a  profit, 
what  should  the  just  reward  of  the  working  class  be 
who  daily  risk  their  lives  in  serving  society.?  The 
capitalist  class  do  take  monetary  risk  in  starting  a 
new  industry,  but  it  is  merely  for  personal  gain ;  it  is 
not  therefore  entitled  to  a  social  reward. 

Capitalists  get  an  income  because  the  present  sys- 
tem as  maintained  by  modem  governments  allows  them 
this  and  protects  them  in  .their  so  doing.  This  is 
one  of  the  "  rights  of  property  " —  a  right  which 
must  necessarily  be  ever  denied  to  the  vast  majority 
of  the  useful  and  productive  class. 

The  Price  of  Labor-Power.  We  have  seen  that  the 
prices  of  commodities  under  capitalism  do  not  coin- 
cide with  their  values.  The  same  is  true  of  the  price 
of  labor  power,  although  the  operation  of  the  law  of 
value  is  more  evident.  Supply  and  demand,  while 
not  a  cause  of  price,  give  rise  to  variations  which  are 


184.  ABC  OF  ECONOMICS 

of  great  importance  to  the  working  class.  As  with 
the  price  of  other  commodities,  supply  and  demand 
neutralize  each  other  in  the  long  run,  but  in  the  case 
of  labor  we  must  remember  that  we  are  dealing  with 
living  beings.  It  is  cold  consolation  to  the  starving 
working  class  of  to-day  that  several  years  hence 
their  real  wages  will  rise  above  that  necessary  to 
maintain  life  at  a  traditional  standard.  The  human 
factor  accordingly  lends  to  supply  and  demand  an 
importance  which  it  does  not  have  in  connection  with 
other  commodities. 

In  a  general  sort  of  way  we  may  assume  that  the 
supply  of  labor  is  determined  by  the  number  of  work- 
ing-class population.  A  most  striking  feature  of 
the  capitalist  system  is  the  great  variation  in  the  de- 
mand for  labor.  We  have  our  seasonal  occupa- 
tions ;  then  our  times  of  industrial  depression. 
Market  conditions  affect  profits  and  these  in  turn 
affect  the  demand  and  consequently  the  price  of 
labor.  Again  the  production  of  gold  which  is  a 
basis  of  our  money  system  has  its  far-reaching  effect 
on  the  demand  for  labor.  We  can  therefore  assume 
that  in  a  general  way  the  supply  of  labor  is  fixed  at 
a  given  period  and  .the  demand  is  variable.  The 
causes  for  the  variations  of  the  price  of  labor  are  a 
part  of  the  workings  of  the  capitalist  system. 

The  price  of  labor  (power)  does  not  fluctuate 
from  day  to  day  as  do  the  prices  of  other  commodi- 
ties. Changes  in  the  general  price  of  labor  are 
slower,  but  in  turn  they  cover  longer  periods.  A 
drop  in  the  price  of  a  commodity  may  be  compen- 
sated within  a  week  or  a  month  by  a  corresponding 
rise.  A  general  drop  in  wages  is  usually  compen- 
sated for  only  by  a  gradual  rise  spreading  over  a 
number   of   years.     The   opposite   is   also    true;   it 


ASPECTS  OF  CAPITAL  136 

takes  years  to  affect  a  fall  in  wages  to  offset  a  pre- 
vious rise.  This  does  not  apply  to  any  particular 
establishment;  it  does  apply  to  the  labor  market  as 
a  whole.  The  law  of  value  is  thus  seen  to  apply 
more  strictly  than  it  does  to  other  commodities. 

Unconsciously  the  workers  are  interested  in  real 
wages,  i.e.y  what  they  can  buy  for  their  nominal 
wages.  If  now,  the  price  of  goods  rises  without  a 
corresponding  increase  in  the  price  of  labor  power, 
then  real  wages  have  fallen.  In  such  a  case  a  higher 
rate  of  wages  must  be  paid  in  order  that  workers 
receive  the  value  of  their  labor  power.  Again  if 
prices  of  goods  fall  the  worker  gets, paid  more  than 
the  value  of  his  labor  power. ^ 

Economic  conditions,  while  not  caused  by  human 
beings,  nevertheless  take  place  only  through  the 
agency  of  human  beings.  This  applies  to  the  fluc- 
tuations in  the  price  of  labor.  The  capitalist  class 
wants  labor  as  cheap  as  possible  all  the  time.  The 
working  class  wants  higher  wages  all  the  time.  The 
result  of  this  .clash  is  to  fix  the  price  of  labor  at 
about  its  value.  When  the  demand  for  labor  is  low 
then  economic  conditions  favor  the  capitalist  class 
and  the  tendency  of  wages  is  to  fall.  When  the  de- 
mand for  labor  is  good  economic  conditions  favor 
the  workers  and  the  tendency  of  wages  is  to  rise. 
The  capitalist  class  at  all  times  has  one  great  ad- 
vantage in  the  army  of  the  unemployed.  The  de- 
sire to  live  is  the  strongest  motive  in  all  human  be- 

»The  authors  must  here  again  refer  to  the  great  distinction 
between  the  value  of  labor  power  and  the  value  of  its  products. 
The  former  is  always  less  than  the  latter,  the  difference  between 
the  two  making  up  surplus  value.  Socialists  demand  that  the 
worker  receive  the  value  of  what  he  has  created,  and  not  the 
value  of  hia  labor  power,  which,  approximately,  he  receives 
to-day. 


186  ABC  OF  ECONOMICS 

ings,  and  in  order  to  live  the  worker  must  work. 
If  he  cannot  get  work  at  market  rates,  he  will,  in 
time,  work  for  less  than  the  market  price.  The 
workers  ,must  at  all  times  compete  with  this  army, 
and  when  this  army  is  big  the  chances  of  the  work- 
ing class  for  success  are  negligible. 

Orgardzed  Labor.  Manufacturers  must  know 
the  market  price  ,of  their  commodities  before  they 
can  sell  them  for  the  greatest  profit.  The  same 
applies  to  the  working  class.  However,  the  work- 
ing class  have  not  market  bulletins  which  quote 
prices.  In  order  to  know  and  demand  this  price  the 
working  class  must  organize  on  the  industrial  field. 
In  this  way  they  can  learn  what  their  labor  power 
is  worth  and  prevent  price-reducing  competition  in 
their  endeavor  to  get  it.  This  is  then  a  general  law 
which  governs  strikes.  Strikes  are  called  when  the 
wages  and  conditions  are  less  than  what  are  war- 
ranted by  market  conditions.  There  are  two  ex- 
ceptions to  this  rule.  First,  where  the  working 
class  is  swayed  to  strike  by  irresponsible  leaders 
rather  than  ,by  economic  conditions  of  the  market. 
Siu;h  strikes  almost  always  result  in  such  crushing 
defeats  that  demoralization  of  the  defeated  workers 
results.  The  labor  movement  receives  a  severe  set- 
back which  requires  ; years  for  recovery.  Second, 
where  labor  is  able  to  become  a  monopoly.  In  this 
case  the  monopoly  price  sets  the  highest  limit. 

The  general  ignorance  of  the  working  class  as  to 
market-values  results  in  almost  universal  payment 
of  wages  which  are  below  the  price  which  would  be 
determined  by  the  laws  of  capitalism.  The  eco- 
nomic conditions  of  the  workers  is  below  the  stand- 
ard predetermined  by  capitalism  and  workers  can 
make  absolute  and  relative  gains  ;by  organizing  in- 


ORGANIZED  LABOR  18T 

dustrially.  The  craft  form  of  labor  organization 
owes  its  success  to  its  character  of  being  a  monopoly, 
and  the  so-called  evils  of, labor  unions  are  due  to 
this  monopolistic  character. 

That  labor  organizations  have  made  absolute  and 
relative  gains  for  the  workers  is  too  well  verified  by 
experience  to  be  denied.  These  victories  have  mis- 
led many  as  to  the  possibilities  of  labor-organiza- 
tions. Those  who  have  been  thus  misled  believe  that 
organized  labor  alone  is  enough  to  get  finally  the 
full  value  of  its  product.  Such  belief  is  the  result 
of  an  ignorance  of  economics  and  the  improper  inter- 
pretation of  the  results  of  labor-organizations. 

The  demands  of  organized  labor  are  not  the  result 
of  mere  desire.  Economic  determinism  teaches  us 
that  these  demands  are  predetermined  by  economic 
conditions.  Some  of  these  conditions  we  have  al- 
ready enumerated.  Consequently  we  can  reason 
that  no  strike  can  be  successful  which  exceeds  the 
demands  warranted  by  economic  conditions.  Under 
capitalism  ,the  law  of  value  of  labor  power  is  the 
basis  which  determines  such  conditions.  Organized 
labor  cannot,  then,  receive  more  than  favorable  fluc- 
tuations from  this  value,  without  first  abolishing 
capitalism.  Unfortunately  for  the  working  class, 
strikes  attempting  to  get  more  than  the  market  value 
have  been  undertaken  with  the  usual  defeat.  In  the 
case  of  monopolistic  trade-unions,  the  best  they  can 
get  is  monopoly  price,  which  is  a  ,form  of  market 
price. 

The  above  limitations  to  the  possibilities  of  labor 
organizations  does  not  mean  that, the  workers  cannot 
get  absolute  gains.  The  law  of  value  as  applied  to 
labor  says  essentially  that  the  value  of  labor-power 
is  determined  by  the  labor-power  necessary  to  main- 


188  ABC  OF  ECONOMICS 

tain  the  worker  at  a  certain  standard  of  living. 
This  does  not  mean  that  all  that  organized  labor  can 
get  is  a  mere  existence.  The  standard  of  living  has 
been  rising  for  a  considerable  period.  This  is  not 
necessarily  due  to  the  direct  efforts  of  the  organized 
workers  but  to  changes  taking  place  in  the  methods 
of  production.  It  is,  however,  true  that  organized 
labor  is  the  first  to  take  advantage  of  such  changes. 
The  use  of  labor-saving  devices  results  in  greater 
efficiency.  Most  of  this  goes  to  the  capitalist  class 
but  some  of  it  goes  to  the  workers  in  the  form  of 
more  pay  and  less  hours.  This  is  offset,  however,  by 
the  fact  that  more  people  are  added  to  the  army  of 
unemployed. 

The  working  class  organized  on  the  industrial 
field  can  demand  such  increases  in  wages  as  to  bring 
wages  up  to  the  market  value.  Such  increases  re- 
sult in  reduced  profits.  In  addition,  the  working 
class  thus  organized  can  take  advantage  of  economic 
changes  and  improve  the  standard  of  living.  Such 
improvements  take  place,  however,  only  when  the 
capitalist  class  receives  benefits  which  are  far  greater 
in  proportion  than  those  received  by  the  workers. 
The  workers  gain  absolutely,  but  in  comparison  to 
the  capitalist  class  the  breach  is  widened;  i.e.y  there 
is  a  relative  loss.  Economic  conditions  automat- 
ically prevent  wages  from  rising  appreciably  higher 
than  market-values.  Among  such  conditions  are, 
supply  and  demand,  the  competition  among  em- 
ployed and  unemployed  for  work,  the  production  of 
gold,  foreign  markets,  and  the  substitution  of  ma- 
chinery for  labor. 

The  powers  of  industrially  organized  labor  are 
determined  by  capitalism.  The  clashes  about 
wages,  hours,  conditions,  etc.,  are  not  fights  against 


ORGANIZED  LABOR  139 

capitalisTn,  but  are  merely  struggles  incidental  to 
the  carrying  out  of  the  economic  laws  of  capitalism. 
Practically  all  of  these  class  struggles  are  for  the 
purpose  of  maintaining  the  value  of  labor. 

Karl  Marx  sums  this  up  in  the  last  chapter  of 
"  Value,  Price  and  Profit,"  as  follows : 

"  At  the  same  time,  and  quite  apart  from  the  gen- 
eral servitude  involved  in  the  wages  system,  the 
working  class  ought  not  to  exaggerate  to  themselves 
the  ultimate  working  of  these  every-day  struggles. 
They  ought  not  to  forget  that  they  are  fighting  with 
effects,  but  not  with  the  causes  of  those  effects; 
that  they  are  retarding  the  downward  movement,  but 
not  changing  its  direction ;  that  they  are  applying 
palliatives,  not  curing  the  malady.  They  ought, 
therefore,  not  to  be  exclusively  absorbed  in  these 
guerrilla  fights  incessantly  springing  up  from  the 
never-ceasing  encroachments  of  capital  or  changes 
of  the  market.  They  ought  to  understand  that  with 
all  the  miseries  it  imposes  upon  them,  the  present 
system  simultaneously  engenders  the  material  condi- 
tions and  the  social  forms  necessary  for  an  econom- 
ical reconstruction  of  society.  Instead  of  the  con- 
servative motto,  A  fair  day^s  wages  for  a  fair  day's 
worky  they  ought  to  inscribe  on  their  banner  the 
revolutionary  watchword.  Abolition  or  the  wage 

SYSTEM." 

The  economic  interpretation  of  history  shows  that 
such  a  change  of  system  can  be  made  only  through 
political     power.  ^^     The     "  direct     actionists "     of 

10  It  should  be  remembered,  in  connection  with  the  class  strug- 
gle and  its  political  character,  that,  as  Ralph  Komgold  says  in 
his  excellent  pamphlet  "  Are  There  Classes  In  America? " 
(1914.  Pub.  by  The  Socialist  Party,  803  W.  Madison  St.,  Chi- 
cago), "All  these  class  struggles  aimed  at  the  conquest  of 
p<ditical  power,  not  as  an  end  in  itself,  but  as  a  means  to  the 


140  A  B  C  OF  ECONOMICS 

labor  unions,  as  Karl  Kautsky  points  out  in  his 
''  Road  to  Power,"  "  can  operate  effectively  only  as 
an  auxiliary  and  reenforcement  to,  and  not  as  a 
substitute  for  parliamentary  action." 

acquisition  of  industrial  power."  The  pamphlet  as  a  whole  is  an 
admirable  introduction  to  the  various  matters  of  Socialist  party 
tactics. 


IMPORTANT  RADICAL  BOOKS 

THE  A  B  C  OF  SOCIALISM 

Paper,   $  .25   net.     Cloth,   $  .50   net 
By  the  Editors  of  the  "New  England  Socialist" 

A  most  comprehensive  study  of  the  Socialist  doctrine,  the 
book  contains  a  list  of  new  answers  to  old  objections 
against   Socialism. 

LETTERS   FROM   PRISON 

Paper,  $  .25  net.     Cloth,  $  .50  net 
By  BoucK  White,  Pastor  of  the  Church  of  the  SociaZ  Revoke 
tion 

A  wonderful  series  of  revolutionary  doctrines.     The  pic- 
tures of  prison  life  will  rank  among  the  finest  contributions 
to  the  realistic  literature  of  the  world. 
ALICE  AND  THE  STORK     Paper,  $  .25  net.     Cloth,  $  .50  net 
By  Henby  T.  Schnittkind 

A  fairy-tale  for  workingmen's   children. 
SONGS  OF  LABOR  $  .75  net 

By    MoERis    ROSBNFELD,    translated   by    Rose    Pastor    Stokes 
and  Helena  Frank,  with  frontispiece. 

Songs  of  the  sweatshop  written  by  those  who  have  suf- 
fered   themselves.     These    poems,     according    to    Professor 
Leo  Wiener,  are  the  saddest  and  the  sweetest  since  Heine. 
The   volume   contains   the  famous   "Song  of   the  Machine." 
THE  CRIMSON  FIST  $1.00  net 

By  the  "Man  Without  a  Country" 

This  book  shows  how  the  five  blood-soaked  fingers  of 
modern  civilization — the  capitalistic,  Home,  School,  Church, 
Press  and  Government,  inflame  the  individual  from  very 
birth  with  a  lust  for  jingoistic  Pat-riotism  and  for  war. 
It  makes  a  plea  to  the  mothers  to  lead  in  a  crusade  against 
war. 
THE   SUBMERGED  $  .75  net 

By   Maxim    Gokky,    formerly   published   under   the   title,    "A 
Night's  Lodging" 

This  is  a  drama  of  the  underworld,  where  poverty,  with 
its  accompanying  evils,  intemperance  and  crime,  have 
changed  human  souls  into  dregs.  Among  them  comes  a 
man  whose  spirit  is  yet  free,  and  the  influence  that  he 
exercises  upon  these  unfortunates  is  described  in  the  most 
vivid  style  of  the  "Bitter  voice  of  Russia." 

RICHARD    G.    BADGER,    PUBLISHER,    BOSTON 


THIS  BOOK  IS^^^^3^I^0W 

""TT'oF    25    CENTS 

AN  '^';^'3'^s.r.^o"«-;^-;°;r.rv 

W»^^  ^^  t  Sn  THE  DATE  ^^E^ JHE  ^^^^ 

D;,Y     and     to     $l-0                                  ^^^^__^ 
OVERDUE.  


WAV    16  1933 
OCT   30  1934 


REC'D  LD 


20193* 

OCT   28  1936 


jui  11^9^9     P 


REC'D  LD 

JUH2    1959 

NOV   17  19^9 
JAN    9    1947 


DEC  29    1947 


\%S 


LD  2l-50"^-l''^' 


&Jc< 


^26 


.-ttit 


m  u///t3 


329339 

.S3 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CAUFORNIA  LIBRARY 


Airr^ 


